Re: [DOCS] the sad state of our FAQs
| От | Brendan Jurd |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: [DOCS] the sad state of our FAQs |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 37ed240d0903081518h5a79d197w1f71aabba00f99da@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: [DOCS] the sad state of our FAQs (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Список | pgsql-www |
On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > I think it might well be true though that it'd be better to have one FAQ > with answers that say something like "Before version x.y, do this ... > in x.y and later, do that ...". That approach makes sure that people > know that they are reading version-specific advice; whereas the separate > FAQs approach makes it pretty easy for people to fail to notice that > they are reading advice that's inappropriate for their version. I agree, and note that at least one of the existing FAQs already adopts this style of advice. In 4.19: "In PostgreSQL versions < 8.3, ... This problem does not occur in PostgreSQL 8.3 and later." While I'm not a big fan of using comparison operators in English prose, this approach seems to work well. > > I guess the sticking point would be about how long to preserve FAQ > entries that are no longer relevant to the current release. > Really something to be worked out on a per-case basis I suppose. If the goal of the FAQ is to help people who have Questions that are Asked Frequently, then we could stop mentioning a release when people stop asking questions about it? Cheers, BJ
В списке pgsql-www по дате отправления: