On 11 April 2012 21:29, Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> wrote: > On ons, 2012-04-04 at 21:53 +0300, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> I think it would be useful to split this up into three sections: > >> F.1. Extensions >> F.2. Client Applications >> F.3. Server Applications > >> where the first looks like now and the other two contain the refentry >> pages. > >> We could also consider making two separate appendixes. Maybe that >> would result in a better table of contents. > > I've played around with this a little bit to see how the tables of > contents etc. turn out. I think the best approach is to have two > appendixes > > F. Additional Supplied Extensions > > with one sect1 per extension, like now, and > > G. Additional Supplied Applications > > with two subsections Client and Server Applications, and one refentry > per application. That would end up looking much like the SPI chapter.
Could you clarify what you're defining to be a client application and a server application? This could be confusing as we already have sections under Reference called "PostgreSQL Client Applications" and "PostgreSQL Server Applications", visible in the root table of contents. -- Thom -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
