Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7B83475A7B for ; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 21:20:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.11.4/8.11.4) with ESMTP id g2C2KYS16360; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 21:20:34 -0500 (EST) To: Peter Eisentraut Cc: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org Subject: Re: Thoughts about the installation instructions In-reply-to: References: Comments: In-reply-to Peter Eisentraut message dated "Mon, 11 Mar 2002 16:53:02 -0500" Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 21:20:34 -0500 Message-ID: <16357.1015899634@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Archive-Number: 200203/30 X-Sequence-Number: 1311 Peter Eisentraut writes: > It is my view that there should be a clean separation between installation > and use documentation. First of all, it's really useless to put > installation info into usage documentation because users see it too late. This is too rigid a worldview. The point of mentioning configuration issues in the usage docs is that usage is when people will *find out* that they misconfigured something. A link letting them know what they need to fix when they observe some particular problem is not out of place in the usage docs. I do agree that the installation procedures should mention all these issues, too. Just don't strip out the references in the usage docs. > Furthermore, remove the chapter(s) on installation from the Admin Guide > and make then a document of their own. This document need only exist in > the source tree and does not need to be installed. Mumble. Certainly this could be a separate "book", but I strongly disagree with removing it from the standard documentation set. To my mind, the "integrated doc" *is* the standard documentation set and should contain everything. regards, tom lane