Message-ID: <46D5BA93.5060801@dunslane.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:27:31 -0400
From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US;
	rv:1.8.0.12) Gecko/20070719 Fedora/1.0.9-2.fc6 pango-text
	SeaMonkey/1.0.9
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
CC: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>,  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org,
	Albert Cervera i Areny <albert@nan-tic.com>, pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Contrib modules documentation online
References: <200708290157.07968.albert@nan-tic.com>
	<200708291009.07942.josh@agliodbs.com>
	<7046.1188410001@sss.pgh.pa.us>
In-Reply-To: <7046.1188410001@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Tom Lane wrote:
> Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
>   
>> If we go ahead with this, I'll commit to doing a contrib README
>> cleanup so the doc system works better.
>>     
>
> Why wouldn't we just remove the README files altogether?  I can't
> see maintaining duplicate sets of documentation.
>
>
>   

Right.

Also, let's recall what has previously been discussed for contrib, 
namely that we break it out into standard modules (think Perl standard 
modules) and other tools, and that we abandon the wholly misleading 
"contrib" name altogether. I really want to see that happen next 
release. Getting the modules properly documented is a very important 
milestone along the way to getting that done. Maybe then the modules 
will be considered more first class citizens (until the buildfarm came 
along they were often hardly tested at all).

cheers

andrew