Received: from magus.postgresql.org ([2a02:c0:301:0:ffff::29])
	by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <jeff.janes@gmail.com>) id 1Tc3a7-0004Td-Po
	for pgsql-docs@postgresql.org; Sat, 24 Nov 2012 00:26:51 +0000
Received: from mail-ie0-f174.google.com ([209.85.223.174])
	by magus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <jeff.janes@gmail.com>) id 1Tc3a5-0001CF-Jn
	for pgsql-docs@postgresql.org; Sat, 24 Nov 2012 00:26:51 +0000
Received: by mail-ie0-f174.google.com with SMTP id k11so4057993iea.19
	for <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>; Fri, 23 Nov 2012 16:26:48 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:cc:content-type;
	bh=dcJMHSB6Ys0b9TwKaDqZFX8ksptPvCjsUCLxmbzvfk8=;
	b=Zk+UJ5M8VYUTcPRAq1KXBwfy1yGmqddudkhNuDBQ3NLtxEaYc7NXL3zHrvRUGxdonc
	xVs+y192s3a08XdzghtXZQQS+4ZX+JVk1ClkDF8w6aGxCbIoZ77rngY9SJCnKyu0hd8M
	m3JGDFk61KPlyNy9YxFMwQ5C1fFGiEf/+q4JVzmj0tY/jf8H2MHw5aMhwlvGn5ja86Og
	mKJa8OX69uq1MzAwVh6oQ7UqjTgwT0OL91cIfUM9duOGuusRxa+Ae3cxJMA6tL2ZRd3V
	bYcsnhxs+h+goIPI3SbIvTeX5L2Vd2IYgix6XJyZ/ZLygc1gL8wjVM2qd1hsyEKojExD
	ZIoA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.43.60.212 with SMTP id wt20mr4314052icb.51.1353716808228; Fri,
	23 Nov 2012 16:26:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.42.85.82 with HTTP; Fri, 23 Nov 2012 16:26:48 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20121123234205.GA1605@momjian.us>
References: 
 <CAMkU=1xdumQ1FeBR=EJAeagjy1+76L9A5ALzE=Dk+yTA2DOs8Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<20121123234205.GA1605@momjian.us>
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2012 16:26:48 -0800
Message-ID: 
 <CAMkU=1y3RveOPn_8c0X8ZTOeiD7A9dwP1GqUoKDU62V_s_zFXQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: 8.4 doc bug for "Incrementally Updated Backups"
From: Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Pg-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--)
X-Archive-Number: 201211/16
X-Sequence-Number: 7508

On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>
> We don't assume people are reading docs from very old versions.
>

Even if that is the version they are using?  It is, after all, still
under maintenance,

Cheers,

Jeff