Re: [DOCS] Contrib modules documentation online
От | Guillaume Lelarge |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [DOCS] Contrib modules documentation online |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 46D68E8E.4080307@lelarge.info обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Contrib modules documentation online (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan a écrit : > > > Albert Cervera i Areny wrote: >>> I'm very strongly in favor of having this documentation. However, I >>> think >>> it might make sense to put "Contrib Modules" as a section under either >>> "Reference" or "Appendices". Also, I don't think it's necessary to make >>> each command option a separate subchapter, but I can see how that >>> would be >>> hard to avoid in an automated system. >>> >> >> It's not an automated system, README files have different structures >> so it's all manual work. That's why I asked how you think it should be >> organized. Anyone else thinks we should put it in Reference or >> Appendixes? >> > > I would far rather have a new top level heading. Something like > "Standard Modules and Tools". (Please avoid the use of the word > "contrib"). If not, than as a sub-chapter of "References". I don't think > it belongs in the Appendixes. > Appendixes or References are fine to me but not on a top level heading. References would certainly be my (light) preference. If you can find a way to keep each one of them on a single page, it would be best. Having one page for the installation procedure only (see for example this page http://www.nan-tic.com/ftp/pgdoc/x76728.html) is a little too much. Anyways, great work, Albert. Thanks. Regards. -- Guillaume. <!-- http://abs.traduc.org/ http://lfs.traduc.org/ http://docs.postgresqlfr.org/ -->
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: