Message-ID: <46D5F8BF.30703@dunslane.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 18:52:47 -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: Albert Cervera i Areny <albert@nan-tic.com>
CC: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>,  pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org,
	pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Contrib modules documentation online
References: <200708290157.07968.albert@nan-tic.com>
	<200708291009.07942.josh@agliodbs.com>
	<200708300037.31851.albert@nan-tic.com>
In-Reply-To: <200708300037.31851.albert@nan-tic.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Albert Cervera i Areny wrote:
>> I'm very strongly in favor of having this documentation.  However, I think
>> it might make sense to put "Contrib Modules" as a section under either
>> "Reference" or "Appendices".  Also, I don't think it's necessary to make
>> each command option a separate subchapter, but I can see how that would be
>> hard to avoid in an automated system.
>>     
>
> It's not an automated system, README files have different structures so it's 
> all manual work. That's why I asked how you think it should be organized. 
> Anyone else thinks we should put it in Reference or Appendixes?
>   

I would far rather have a new top level heading. Something like 
"Standard Modules and Tools". (Please avoid the use of the word 
"contrib"). If not, than as a sub-chapter of "References". I don't think 
it belongs in the Appendixes.

cheers

andrew