Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1rfNYL-00HIPM-R3 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 17:17:10 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1rfNYK-00D0U2-5K for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 17:17:08 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1rfNYJ-00D0Tu-Sn for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 17:17:08 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([68.162.161.243]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1rfNYG-001r0S-Lq for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 17:17:07 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 41SHH4022322054; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 12:17:04 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: Nathan Bossart cc: Daniel Gustafsson , Andrew Atkinson , PostgreSQL Hackers , samay@tembo.io Subject: Re: An improved README experience for PostgreSQL In-reply-to: <20240228170237.GB2435539@nathanxps13> References: <20240226183018.GA2109010@nathanxps13> <1967819.1708979436@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20240228170237.GB2435539@nathanxps13> Comments: In-reply-to Nathan Bossart message dated "Wed, 28 Feb 2024 11:02:37 -0600" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <2322052.1709140624.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 12:17:04 -0500 Message-ID: <2322053.1709140624@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Nathan Bossart writes: > Sorry, my suggestion wasn't meant to imply that I have any strong concerns > about maintaining two README files. If we can automate generating one or > the other, that'd be great, but I don't see that as a prerequisite to > adding a Markdown version. Agreed, and I'd go so far as to say that adding automation now would be investing work that might well go to waste. When and if we get annoyed by the manual labor involved in maintaining two copies, it'd be time to put work into automating it. regards, tom lane