Thread: Link to beta docs
Our doc webpage, https://www.postgresql.org/docs/ says: 9.6 beta links to the right place with title: PostgreSQL 9.6beta2 Documentation but in should say "9.6 beta2". Would someone please update this? -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 2:42 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
Our doc webpage, https://www.postgresql.org/docs/ says:
9.6 beta
links to the right place with title:
PostgreSQL 9.6beta2 Documentation
but in should say "9.6 beta2". Would someone please update this?
This does not come from the doc webpage rendering specifically, it's in the standard output from our SGML build. So it should probably be directed to the -docs list, but I'm not sure there are more people reading there. (Run a local build and look in index.html and you'll see the same). It gets it from the VERSION variable in Makefile.
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 12:14:32PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 2:42 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > > Our doc webpage, https://www.postgresql.org/docs/ says: > > 9.6 beta > > links to the right place with title: > > PostgreSQL 9.6beta2 Documentation > > but in should say "9.6 beta2". Would someone please update this? > > > This does not come from the doc webpage rendering specifically, it's in the > standard output from our SGML build. So it should probably be directed to the > -docs list, but I'm not sure there are more people reading there. (Run a local > build and look in index.html and you'll see the same). It gets it from the > VERSION variable in Makefile. Well, I ran 'make' in the /doc/src/sgml/ directory. The Makefile has: version.sgml: $(top_srcdir)/configure { \ echo "<!ENTITY version \"$(VERSION)\">"; \ echo "<!ENTITYmajorversion \"$(MAJORVERSION)\">"; \ } > $@ and version.sgml has: <!ENTITY version "9.6beta2"><!ENTITY majorversion "9.6"> That tells me that the Makefile VERSION is already "9.6beta2". I checked index.html too: $ grep -i beta index.html>PostgreSQL 9.6beta2 Documentation</TITLE>PostgreSQL 9.6beta2 Documentation</A and when I run 'make' I see: $ make{ \ echo "<!ENTITY version \"9.6beta2\">"; \ echo "<!ENTITY majorversion \"9.6\">"; \} > version.sgml What am I missing? I don't see a "9.6beta" anywhere. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 4:23 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
-- On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 12:14:32PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 2:42 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>
> Our doc webpage, https://www.postgresql.org/docs/ says:
>
> 9.6 beta
>
> links to the right place with title:
>
> PostgreSQL 9.6beta2 Documentation
>
> but in should say "9.6 beta2". Would someone please update this?
>
>
> This does not come from the doc webpage rendering specifically, it's in the
> standard output from our SGML build. So it should probably be directed to the
> -docs list, but I'm not sure there are more people reading there. (Run a local
> build and look in index.html and you'll see the same). It gets it from the
> VERSION variable in Makefile.
Well, I ran 'make' in the /doc/src/sgml/ directory. The Makefile has:
version.sgml: $(top_srcdir)/configure
{ \
echo "<!ENTITY version \"$(VERSION)\">"; \
echo "<!ENTITY majorversion \"$(MAJORVERSION)\">"; \
} > $@
and version.sgml has:
<!ENTITY version "9.6beta2">
<!ENTITY majorversion "9.6">
That tells me that the Makefile VERSION is already "9.6beta2". I
checked index.html too:
$ grep -i beta index.html
>PostgreSQL 9.6beta2 Documentation</TITLE
>PostgreSQL 9.6beta2 Documentation</A
and when I run 'make' I see:
$ make
{ \
echo "<!ENTITY version \"9.6beta2\">"; \
echo "<!ENTITY majorversion \"9.6\">"; \
} > version.sgml
What am I missing? I don't see a "9.6beta" anywhere.
Oh, now I see what you're referring to. My bad.
And then the proper answer is no, it should not say 9.6beta2. Because it lists the *major* version, not the minor. We do attach the beta to make sure people realize it's not released, but if you look at the same place for 9.5 for example, you see it says 9.5 not 9.5.3.
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 04:25:58PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote: > Oh, now I see what you're referring to. My bad. > > And then the proper answer is no, it should not say 9.6beta2. Because it lists > the *major* version, not the minor. We do attach the beta to make sure people > realize it's not released, but if you look at the same place for 9.5 for > example, you see it says 9.5 not 9.5.3. > OK. http://pglife.momjian.us is showing: Development: 9.6 beta, 9.6beta2 For previous releases it showed: Development: 9.5 beta, 9.6 I think the difference is that we didn't split off the tree after the first beta like we normally do. Anyway, the display is accurate, so I guess it is fine. Thanks. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 5:37 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 04:25:58PM +0200, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> Oh, now I see what you're referring to. My bad.
>
> And then the proper answer is no, it should not say 9.6beta2. Because it lists
> the *major* version, not the minor. We do attach the beta to make sure people
> realize it's not released, but if you look at the same place for 9.5 for
> example, you see it says 9.5 not 9.5.3.
>
OK. http://pglife.momjian.us is showing:
While useful, I don't think that site really is an authority on what is on the main website. It's really the other way around...
Development: 9.6 beta, 9.6beta2
For previous releases it showed:
Development: 9.5 beta, 9.6
I think the difference is that we didn't split off the tree after the
first beta like we normally do. Anyway, the display is accurate, so I
guess it is fine. Thanks.
Once there is a branch for 10.0 to load docs from the display will change to include it yes.
But I'm fairly sure we don't normally split off the tree after the first beta. 9.5 for example we split off way before the beta (at alpha1). My first guess would be that the symptoms is mostly because of observation time :)