Re: PostgreSQL-9.0alpha: jade required?
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PostgreSQL-9.0alpha: jade required? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 29118.1267794594@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PostgreSQL-9.0alpha: jade required? (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: PostgreSQL-9.0alpha: jade required?
Re: PostgreSQL-9.0alpha: jade required? Re: PostgreSQL-9.0alpha: jade required? |
Список | pgsql-bugs |
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes: > On tor, 2010-03-04 at 17:53 +0000, Lou Picciano wrote: >> ./configure --no-docs or ./configure --with-htmldocs-only > But that would be a negative regression for end users, who we want to > have the docs available by default, so they can read them. "End users" in that sense would almost certainly be working from a distribution tarball, if not a prepackaged distro. I don't think this discussion is about them; it's about what is most convenient for developers. As a developer, I don't find the current arrangement convenient in the least. What I'd be for is breaking the docs out as a separate top-level target, ie "make docs", "make install-docs". I don't much care for Lou's suggestion of tying it to a configure option because that imposes the significant additional cost of re-configuring when I change my mind. I do need to be *able* to build the docs, I just don't want it happening by surprise. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: