Received: from golem.fourpalms.org (www.fourpalms.org [64.3.68.148]) by mail.postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2K5wZN46644; Tue, 20 Mar 2001 00:58:36 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu) Received: from alumni.caltech.edu (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by golem.fourpalms.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78EA8FEB4; Tue, 20 Mar 2001 05:58:34 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <3AB6F18A.8E3E46C7@alumni.caltech.edu> Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 05:58:34 +0000 From: Thomas Lockhart Reply-To: lockhart@fourpalms.org Organization: Yes X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.17-21mdksmp i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Lane Cc: Peter Eisentraut , pgsql-hackers@postgreSQL.org, pgsql-docs@postgreSQL.org Subject: Re: src/test/regress/README duplicates SGML material References: <7894.985043317@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archive-Number: 200103/100 X-Sequence-Number: 534 > >> Is it really necessary to maintain identical text in the test README > >> file and in the SGML docs? I'm sorely tempted to remove the README > >> rather than double-editing yet again. > > It's referenced from the INSTALL file, because people presumably won't be > > able to read the HTML during installation. Actually, the README was once > > generated from the HTML version. It can be done again, but the exact > > process it kind of hazy. > If you've got any hints, I could really use a clue right about now ... > otherwise I'll have to do these LOCALE edits twice ... Just make sure that we have a *complete* list of files which need to be formatted from sgml to something other than HTML and postscript or pdf and we'll get them built for the release. Mostly depending on who is doing the work, the process seems to bounce between using sgml->rtf->text or sgml->html->text, with each having pros and cons. - Thomas