From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>,
        =?utf-8?Q?J=C3=BCrgen?= Purtz <juergen@purtz.de>,
        pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: DocBook 5.2
In-reply-to: <YzIY/OCgljTdqOgX@momjian.us>
References: <ae14eca5-f57c-2db2-42ce-258bab3c6806@purtz.de>
 <20220905111508.wzgmpbcarxizdnin@alvherre.pgsql>
 <YzIY/OCgljTdqOgX@momjian.us>
Comments: In-reply-to Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
	message dated "Mon, 26 Sep 2022 17:26:20 -0400"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-ID: <3524031.1664228552.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2022 17:42:32 -0400
Message-ID: <3524032.1664228552@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/3524032.1664228552%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> On Mon, Sep  5, 2022 at 01:15:08PM +0200, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
>> OK, these seem quite significant changes that are likely to cause great
>> pain.  So I repeat my question, what are the benefits of making this
>> change?  They better be very very substantial.

> Would we be converting docs for all supported versions of Postgres to
> use DocBook 5.2, or just the most current version?  If the later, we
> would find backpatching a pain for five years.

Yeah, I think we'd have to convert all the supported versions to
make this palatable.  If the conversion is sufficiently automated,
that might not be a big lift.  (If it's *not* automated, I think
the change would never get off the ground even for HEAD, because
the docs are too much of a moving target.)

			regards, tom lane