On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 04:19:48PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > > So, should we rename the *.sgml files to *.xml, since they are actually > > now XML files? > > At that point, back-patching documentation fixes would become effectively > impossible except through manual intervention in the patching process. > I don't want to go there. The recent changes have already imposed a > significant PITA factor on generating minor-release notes, and this > would push it past what I care to deal with. > > As I've remarked before, the issue would disappear if we were to > back-patch the XML-ization of the documentation. So I'd be fine > with this if we did it uniformly in the supported branches. Otherwise > I think the costs outweigh the benefits.
+1 for back-patching. Are there scripts for (at least the first cut of) this? Best, David. -- David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
