Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.184]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F36649F9E4A; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 06:32:06 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.184]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 08024-03; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 06:31:57 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.5 Received: from sd-2317.dedibox.fr (sd-2317.dedibox.fr [88.191.17.192]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FE859F9B37; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 06:32:02 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sd-2317.dedibox.fr (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by sd-2317.dedibox.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14E86D5F2; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 11:32:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.10.67] (ASte-Genev-Bois-153-1-28-65.w83-112.abo.wanadoo.fr [83.112.74.65]) by sd-2317.dedibox.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id B00BFA86B; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 11:31:59 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <46D68E8E.4080307@lelarge.info> Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 11:31:58 +0200 From: Guillaume Lelarge User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Dunstan CC: Albert Cervera i Areny , Josh Berkus , 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> <46D5F8BF.30703@dunslane.net> In-Reply-To: <46D5F8BF.30703@dunslane.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200708/39 X-Sequence-Number: 4386 Andrew Dunstan a écrit : > > > 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. > Appendixes or References are fine to me but not on a top level heading. References would certainly be my (light) preference. If you can find a way to keep each one of them on a single page, it would be best. Having one page for the installation procedure only (see for example this page http://www.nan-tic.com/ftp/pgdoc/x76728.html) is a little too much. Anyways, great work, Albert. Thanks. Regards. -- Guillaume.