Guillaume Lelarge wrote:
> Dave Page a écrit :
>> I've been thinking about trying to sort out the documentation included
>> in pgAdmin. As you know, we currently bundle both the PostgreSQL and
>> Slony docs with pgAdmin - what you may not know is that integrating
>> these together at build time is
From: "Guillaume Lelarge"
If we were to do the latter, in the Windows Installer for PostgreSQL
(which we also need to consider, because it relies on our bundled docs),
we would just build the CHM files for each of the three packages,
without trying to merge them together.
Thoughts?
I woul
Dave Page a écrit :
I've been thinking about trying to sort out the documentation included
in pgAdmin. As you know, we currently bundle both the PostgreSQL and
Slony docs with pgAdmin - what you may not know is that integrating
these together at build time is a real pain, not to mention that th
Magnus Hagander wrote:
I think 2 is good, provided that the windows installer (or RPM packages
or whatever is used on Mac) can be configured to pick up something by
default. So that I don't have to figure out where my pg docs are if I just
installed the bundle.
OK, here's what I'm thinking.
1)
On Wed, May 16, 2007 at 12:15:06PM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've been thinking about trying to sort out the documentation included
> in pgAdmin. As you know, we currently bundle both the PostgreSQL and
> Slony docs with pgAdmin - what you may not know is that integrating
> these togeth
Hi,
I've been thinking about trying to sort out the documentation included
in pgAdmin. As you know, we currently bundle both the PostgreSQL and
Slony docs with pgAdmin - what you may not know is that integrating
these together at build time is a real pain, not to mention that those
docs accou
