On Tue, Sep 2, 2025 at 5:54 PM Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 2025-09-01 Mo 11:44 AM, Florents Tselai wrote:
>
>
>
> On 1 Sep 2025, at 4:35 PM, Euler Taveira wrote:
>
> On Mon, Sep 1, 2025, at 7:35 AM, Florents Tselai wrote:
>
> While working on this https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/6020/
>
On Mon, Sep 1, 2025, at 7:35 AM, Florents Tselai wrote:
> While working on this https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/6020/
> I discovered that when changing for func/func-aggregate.sgml, the HTML
> wasn’t marked for update.
>
> IIUC the doc/Makefile should be updated as attached, right ?
>
Go
On 2025-09-01 Mo 11:44 AM, Florents Tselai wrote:
On 1 Sep 2025, at 4:35 PM, Euler Taveira wrote:
On Mon, Sep 1, 2025, at 7:35 AM, Florents Tselai wrote:
While working on this https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/6020/
I discovered that when changing for func/func-aggregate.sgml, the HT
On 1 Sep 2025, at 4:35 PM, Euler Taveira wrote:
On Mon, Sep 1, 2025, at 7:35 AM, Florents Tselai wrote:
While working on this https://commitfest.postgresql.org/patch/6020/
I discovered that when changing for func/func-aggregate.sgml, the HTML
wasn’t marked for update.
IIUC the doc/Makefile shou
On 4 Aug 2025, at 4:09 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 2025-07-29 Tu 11:40 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan writes:
OK. I'm inclined to do this after the CF finishes, to avoid collisions
with other patches. I assume it's going to make the CFbot fairly unhappy.
+1 for proceeding that way. (I
On 2025-07-29 Tu 11:40 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan writes:
OK. I'm inclined to do this after the CF finishes, to avoid collisions
with other patches. I assume it's going to make the CFbot fairly unhappy.
+1 for proceeding that way. (I did not look at whether the proposed
changes are
Andrew Dunstan writes:
> OK. I'm inclined to do this after the CF finishes, to avoid collisions
> with other patches. I assume it's going to make the CFbot fairly unhappy.
+1 for proceeding that way. (I did not look at whether the proposed
changes are sane, but I agree that this'll inevitably b
On 2025-07-29 Tu 2:15 AM, jian he wrote:
hi.
after run the v2 python script and ``git apply
v2-0001-update-filelist.sgml-allfiles.sgml.no-cfbot``
git status -u
shows:
Changes not staged for commit:
(use "git add/rm ..." to update what will be committed)
(use "git restore ..." to discard
hi.
after run the v2 python script and ``git apply
v2-0001-update-filelist.sgml-allfiles.sgml.no-cfbot``
git status -u
shows:
Changes not staged for commit:
(use "git add/rm ..." to update what will be committed)
(use "git restore ..." to discard changes in working directory)
modified
On Thu, Mar 20, 2025 at 10:16 AM David G. Johnston
wrote:
>
> In short, ready to commit (see last paragraph below however), but the
> committer will need to run the python script at the time of commit on the
> then-current tree.
>
hi.
more explanation, since the python script seems quite large.
On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 1:11 PM Corey Huinker
wrote:
> The following is step-by-step logic.
>>
>>
> The end result (one file per section) seems good to me.
>
> I suspect that reviewer burden may be the biggest barrier to going
> forward. Perhaps breaking up the changes so that each new sect1 file
>
> The following is step-by-step logic.
>
>
The end result (one file per section) seems good to me.
I suspect that reviewer burden may be the biggest barrier to going forward.
Perhaps breaking up the changes so that each new sect1 file gets its own
commit, allowing the reviewer to more easily (if
hi.
move to a new thread.
Since the old thread[1], many things have interacted together.
we are going to split func.sgml to 31 inviduaul sgml files.
the new file name pattern is "func-" as the prefix.
all the func-*.sgml files stored in doc/src/sgml/func
based on the original func.sgml line numbe
13 matches
Mail list logo
