Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-3.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44A5E1337C1B for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 12:46:33 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.243]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 52681-01-6 for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 15:46:26 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from momjian.us (momjian.us [70.90.9.53]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59A161337C7A for ; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 12:44:55 -0300 (ADT) Received: (from bruce@localhost) by momjian.us (8.11.6/8.11.6) id p3QFidx17272; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:44:39 -0400 (EDT) From: Bruce Momjian Message-Id: <201104261544.p3QFidx17272@momjian.us> Subject: Re: Building PDFs error: \pdfendlink ended up in different nesting level than \pd In-Reply-To: <1303831979-sup-5180@alvh.no-ip.org> To: Alvaro Herrera Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 11:44:39 -0400 (EDT) CC: Tom Lane , Peter Eisentraut , Josh Kupershmidt , pgsql-docs X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL124 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.91 tagged_above=-5 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201104/90 X-Sequence-Number: 6661 Alvaro Herrera wrote: > Excerpts from Bruce Momjian's message of mar abr 26 12:15:50 -0300 2011: > > Tom Lane wrote: > > > Peter Eisentraut writes: > > > > On lr, 2011-03-12 at 09:13 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > >> OK, it is not something worthwhile, or just something you don't have > > > >> time for. If the later, can you give us a hint on how to fix it? > > > > > > > I'm not even sure what the actual action item is supposed to be. > > > > > > The last suggestion in the thread was to move the contrib docs up one > > > level in the hierarchy, ie each contrib module would get a chapter not a > > > sect1. > > > > I think we would have to move "Additional Supplied Modules" up into its > > own book, and then list each module. The problem is that there are 42 > > modules so that list is going to be pretty long in the table of > > contents. > > Also, most of the sections are pretty short. Making each of them a > chapter seems a waste. I think some of them deserve a full chapter > (dblink, citext?, hstore, intarray, ltree, pgbench, pgcrypto, pgtrgm?, > pg_upgrade, tablefunc), but most don't. (Some of the others could, > perhaps, get moved under "Reference"). > > Would it work to move only some? I think moving some would be even worse than what we have now, unless you can propose some logic about why they would be split. -- Bruce Momjian http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +