On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 02:05:44PM -0800, David Fetter wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 01:50:47PM -0600, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> > It would be nice if there was an easy place to see the documentation
> > for the various contrib projects. Would this be hard to setup? I
> > think the plain text woul
On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 12:22:44PM -0600, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 02:05:44PM -0800, David Fetter wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 01:50:47PM -0600, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> > > It would be nice if there was an easy place to see the documentation
> > > for the various contrib pr
On Friday 17 March 2006 13:40, David Fetter wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 12:22:44PM -0600, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 02:05:44PM -0800, David Fetter wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 01:50:47PM -0600, Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> > > > It would be nice if there was an easy plac
On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 04:19:58PM -0500, Robert Treat wrote:
> > > Yeah, but very few people would ever think to look in CVS for
> > > documentation. I think it'd be much better if we could include the
> > > README's in the documentation build process somehow...
> >
> > I'm all for it. Do you hav
"Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 04:19:58PM -0500, Robert Treat wrote:
>> Could we require contrib authors to provide their documentation as sgml, and
>> then have the doc build process loop in each contrib module as an appendix
>> inside the official docs?
>
On Saturday 18 March 2006 02:00, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 04:19:58PM -0500, Robert Treat wrote:
> >> Could we require contrib authors to provide their documentation as sgml,
> >> and then have the doc build process loop in each contrib
