X-Original-To: pgsql-docs-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.2]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B732D1B979 for ; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 16:07:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (neptune.hub.org [200.46.204.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 77437-02 for ; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 12:07:22 -0400 (AST) Received: from curie.credativ.org (credativ.com [217.160.209.18]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA100D1BA93 for ; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 12:07:21 -0400 (AST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by curie.credativ.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34DAE55EF7; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 17:07:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from colt.pezone.net (dsl-213-023-254-012.arcor-ip.net [213.23.254.12]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by curie.credativ.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBEC455BEB; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 17:07:12 +0100 (CET) From: Peter Eisentraut To: Tom Lane Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql-server/doc/src/sgml Makefile Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 17:07:12 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.1 Cc: Bruce Momjian , PostgreSQL-documentation References: <200403082235.i28MZXG19415@candle.pha.pa.us> <200403090910.53401.peter_e@gmx.net> <25307.1078845873@sss.pgh.pa.us> In-Reply-To: <25307.1078845873@sss.pgh.pa.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200403091707.12222.peter_e@gmx.net> X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS at credativ.com X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at postgresql.org X-Archive-Number: 200403/17 X-Sequence-Number: 2307 Tom Lane wrote: > Okay. I see that both postgresql.org and Bruce are generating the > docs with > Modular DocBook HTML Stylesheet Version 1.7 There is no version "1.7". This is in fact a bug; the correct version number of the latest version (which is in use at postgresql.org) is 1.78. > Shall we standardize on that and lynx 2.8.5 as the current "official" > versions to use for building the docs? Works for me. > Also, I'm running openjade 1.3 on this machine, and as I recall it > was a serious pain in the arse to build. Is it worth worrying about > a newer version of that? Well, there is 1.3.2 now, but I can't tell you how easy or hard to build that one is. There is also a 1.4 in the making, but the whole DSSSL toolchain is sort of dying.