On 4/4/11, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Christopher Browne <cbbro...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Susanne Ebrecht <susa...@2ndquadrant.com> >> wrote: >>> Anyway, I figured out there is another argument for XML: >>> >>> My information is that DocBook 5.0 won't support SGML anymore. >>> >>> Which means - sooner or later a reaction is needed. >> >> Yes, indeed. >> >> I don't think that during the 9.1 alpha phase is the right time to >> think about this, but this certainly seems appropriate to consider as >> a 9.2 "ToDo" item. >> >> There are arguments as to why to switch to version 5, which is, >> indeed, XML-only. >> http://www.docbook.org/tdg5/en/html/ch01.html#introduction-why-to-switch > > AFAICT, the biggest problem with our existing toolchain is that it's > hard for some people to get it working. In theory, we have > documentation that explains this: > > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/static/docguide-toolsets.html > > However, in contrast to the vast majority of our documentation, it stinks. >
I've certainly wasted non-trivial amounts of time trying to get it to work on some platforms. I'd be *very* glad to see us using a simplified toolchain if possible. Another point to note is that whilst it will still be possible to install older versions of docbook for a while, presumably that'll become more and more of a pain, as distros update to 5.x, requiring users to start building manually, and having to deal with parallel installations of two versions. -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
