Message-ID: <46D6C279.5050200@dunslane.net>
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 09:13:29 -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: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
CC: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
	Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org,
	Albert Cervera i Areny <albert@nan-tic.com>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Contrib modules documentation online
References: <200708290157.07968.albert@nan-tic.com>
	<7046.1188410001@sss.pgh.pa.us> <46D5BA93.5060801@dunslane.net>
	<200708301336.01489.peter_e@gmx.net>
In-Reply-To: <200708301336.01489.peter_e@gmx.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 29. August 2007 20:27 schrieb Andrew Dunstan:
>   
>> Also, let's recall what has previously been discussed for contrib,
>> namely that we break it out into standard modules
>>     
>
> But that would also mean that the documentation system is somewhat 
> modularized.  

What? No it doesn't. You have missed the key word in the sentence above: 
"standard". The idea is that the docs will describe the *standard* 
modules, i.e. those that ship with the PostgreSQL core distribution 
(because they are currently in contrib).

If you want to design a pluggable documentation system then go for it, 
but it's not required by what I understand is the consensus plan for 
contrib.


cheers

andrew