Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ihJg7-0001Xb-Cb for pgsql-www@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 20:42:47 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ihJg4-0004Ul-Ro for pgsql-www@arkaria.postgresql.org; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 20:42:44 +0000 Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1ihJg4-0004UT-Jw; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 20:42:44 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by magus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1ihJg2-0005l3-0H; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 20:42:44 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id xBHKgY2u014826; Tue, 17 Dec 2019 15:42:34 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: Magnus Hagander cc: Dave Cramer , Peter Eisentraut , PostgreSQL-development , PostgreSQL WWW Subject: Re: client auth docs seem to have devolved In-reply-to: References: <13336.1576598463@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Magnus Hagander message dated "Tue, 17 Dec 2019 20:58:46 +0100" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <14824.1576615354.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 15:42:34 -0500 Message-ID: <14825.1576615354@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk Magnus Hagander writes: > On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 5:01 PM Tom Lane wrote: >> I suggest changing the sect1's contents to be a list of available auth >> methods, linked to their subsections. That would provide approximately >> the same quality-of-use as the subsection TOC that used to be there. > Yeah, that sounds better. Is there some docbook magic that can do that for > us? I was just intending to do it the hard way, since even if such magic exists, it'd probably only regurgitate the section titles. It seems more useful to allow for some descriptive text along with that. (Not a lot, but maybe a full sentence for each one.) regards, tom lane