On Sat, Jul 13, 2013 at 3:12 AM, Daniel Farina <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 5:44 PM, Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote: >> Daniel Farina <[email protected]> writes: >>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 3:28 AM, Magnus Hagander <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> But I can understand the confusion - do you have a suggestion for how >>>> to write it to make it more obvious what the actual problem is? >> >>> I don't think I communicated the problem right. >> >> Yeah, you did, but we need a concrete suggestion as to how to improve >> the wording. > > Yeah. Well, I wanted to make sure I got my point across right before > doing any suggestions.
Just FWIW, you did get it across fine to me at least :) >> I wonder if just adding "in" would help: >> >> This page in other versions: 9.2 / 9.1 / 9.0 / 8.4 | In unsupported >> versions: 9.3 / 8.3 / 8.2 / 8.1 / 8.0 / 7.4 / 7.3 / 7.2 / devel > > That seems like a good suggestion to me. Granted, this kind of user > complaint is pretty rare to catch articulated, so it's hard to do much > other than intuition...but I like it. That would certainly be easy enough to do. Another thought is should we somehow deal with 9.3 different specifically? IIRC I've heard this complaint once before - and that was during 9.2 beta... During "normal non-beta months", it's more apparent - the problem here is, if I understand you correctly, that 9.3 is labeled as unsupported (which it is, but it made the person think that the functionality would be unsupported once 9.3 is *released*, which it certainly won't be). So maybe a cross with Peters suggestoin whereby we somehow split it into 3 groups - one that has supported versions, one that has unsupported, and one that has development (which now would be devel and 9.3). Might that be even better? -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list ([email protected]) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs
