Date: Wed, 7 May 2008 17:02:11 -0400
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Scott Marlowe <scott.marlowe@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
	pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: order of entries in admin docs
Message-ID: <20080507210211.GQ20150@alvh.no-ip.org>
References: <20080507192717.GO20150@alvh.no-ip.org>
	<200805071936.m47JasM01013@momjian.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <200805071936.m47JasM01013@momjian.us>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14)

Bruce Momjian escribió:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian escribi?:
> > > Scott Marlowe wrote:
> > 
> > > > Well, if you say so.  It seems like a natural part of it to me, but
> > > > the modifications required to move things like that are pretty big,
> > > > and I really don't feel comfortable enough in sgml to get it right.
> > > 
> > > Right now we have all postgresql.conf documentation in the same chapter.
> > > To move it would split that up, which I think is confusing.
> > 
> > Perhaps it would be better to have prose explaining all the stuff
> > structured like Scott proposes, and make the postgresql.conf be just a
> > reference linking to that.  I don't think making postgresql.conf be the
> > primary documentation is very nice.
> 
> So you are suggesting splitting out the postgresql.conf content into its
> relevant sections and just linking to it?  That would work.

Yes, or something like that.  I don't think leaving _just_ the links on
the postgresql.conf would be enough.  But a comprehensive, verbose
explanation should be elsewhere; a short blurb and the link would remain
on the postgresql.conf reference.

-- 
Alvaro Herrera                                http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.