Subject: Re: PDF docs in CVS broken

From: Robert Treat <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 08:21:25 -0500

On Wednesday 18 February 2004 15:06, Alexey Borzov wrote:
> Hi!
>
> PDF docs for versions 7.3 and 7.4 were added to CVS without -kb switch
> (binary) and thus are effectively broken. :[
>

Broken is a strong word, I'd just say misconfigured.  Looked through my 
command history on the 7.4 pdfs and noticed that the first one I uploaded I 
did use -kb but when I decided to rename the file I forgot it on the second 
pass (guess I should have gone to bed first...)  Anywho, I *think* I have 
things updated to have the -kb flag, can you confirm this on your end?

Robert Treat
-- 
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL

---

From: Alexey Borzov <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 18:32:37 +0300

Hi!

Robert Treat wrote:
> Broken is a strong word, I'd just say misconfigured. 

"Broken" in the sense "couldn't be opened by Acrobat Reader".

>  Looked through my 

Looks like it is OK now, at least I *can* open the docs from CVS.

---

From: Alexey Borzov <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 18:53:14 +0300

> Looks like it is OK now, at least I *can* open the docs from CVS.

Sorry. I can open the docs iff I get them via CVS on Linux. I can't open 
them if I get them on Windows, seems there is some "recoding" going on 
as they are not "binary".

And no, PDF doc for 7.4 does not have -kb set.

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 16:36:37 -0400 (AST)

stupid question, but is there a resaon why we have a PDF version of the
docs in CVS in the first place?

On Thu, 19 Feb 2004, Robert Treat wrote:

> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
>                http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs/FAQ.html
>

----
Marc G. Fournier           Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: [email-masked]           Yahoo!: yscrappy              ICQ: 7615664

---

From: Robert Treat <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 16:29:06 -0500

It's content we carry on the website, why wouldn't it be in the websites CVS 
tree?  

Robert Treat

On Friday 20 February 2004 15:36, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > command history on the 7.4 pdfs and noticed that the first one I uploaded
> > I did use -kb but when I decided to rename the file I forgot it on the
> > second pass (guess I should have gone to bed first...)  Anywho, I *think*
> > I have things updated to have the -kb flag, can you confirm this on your
> > end?
> >
> > Robert Treat
> > --

---

From: "Marc G. Fournier" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 21:29:12 -0400 (AST)

> It's content we carry on the website, why wouldn't it be in the websites CVS

Just doesn't seem like a candidate for being commited to CVS ... CVS, to
me, has always been for revision control ... the PDF is generated from the
sgml source, so I'd think that that would be the level that RevControl
would be maintained at ... with a PDF file (or any binary), there are no
"changes" from one revision to the next, so any revisions you might commit
would just check in a whole new version ...

If you look at the CVS side of things, 53Meg out of ~70Meg are the PDF
files:

gborg# du -sk www
69784   www
gborg# du -sk www/docs/pdf
53436   www/docs/pdf

That's a fair amount of space when its redundant to the sgml that its
generated by ...

----

---

From: Robert Treat <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 09:40:43 -0500

Hmm... well, it would just seem odd that a whole section of content from the 
website would not be in the repository... if someone wanted to rebuild the 
site they wouldn't get those pieces, which seems odd.  It also means anyone 
adding pdfs has to have access to the production server to put them up... 
they can't just be uploaded to CVS for everyone to pull.  I guess I just 
don't feel much different between these and regular image files that 
generally don't change but we put in CVS.  While it's true they're not likely 
to change, if there is a problem with the generated file, you might replace 
it with  new revision... 

well, anyone else want to weigh in ?  should we keep the pdf's in CVS or 
delete them?

Robert Treat 

On Friday 20 February 2004 20:29, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> > It's content we carry on the website, why wouldn't it be in the websites
> > CVS tree?
>
> > > > > PDF docs for versions 7.3 and 7.4 were added to CVS without -kb
> > > > > switch (binary) and thus are effectively broken. :[
> > > >
> > > > Broken is a strong word, I'd just say misconfigured.  Looked through
> > > > my command history on the 7.4 pdfs and noticed that the first one I
> > > > uploaded I did use -kb but when I decided to rename the file I forgot
> > > > it on the second pass (guess I should have gone to bed first...) 
> > > > Anywho, I *think* I have things updated to have the -kb flag, can you
> > > > confirm this on your end?
> > > >