Re: pg_dump new -n flag

> Did you update the man pages or docs? I don't see the man page
> changed. Do you want me to do it?

Funny you should ask...

I'm just in the process of converting all of the "utilities" man pages
to sgml. For this release, we should keep the man pages as-is, but we
will have equivalent info in hardcopy and html.

So, I haven't updated the man page yet, but I'll do that. I did update
the usage printout from pg_dump itself.

And, can we be sure to update both sgml and man pages from here to
release to keep them in sync? I should be able to commit most sgml
sources for the utilities this evening; on my list of "must-haves" just
pg_dump, pg_dumpall, and vacuum are left to do.

btw, is "-n" an acceptable choice for the flag? I'd be happy with
anything, but decided that "-q" probably shouldn't be used since many
programs use it to mean "quiet". So -n for "No quotes" is what I chose
instead...

- Tom

> > Did you update the man pages or docs? I don't see the man page
> > changed. Do you want me to do it?
>
> Funny you should ask...
>
> I'm just in the process of converting all of the "utilities" man pages
> to sgml. For this release, we should keep the man pages as-is, but we
> will have equivalent info in hardcopy and html.

Good.

> So, I haven't updated the man page yet, but I'll do that. I did update
> the usage printout from pg_dump itself.

I saw that.

> And, can we be sure to update both sgml and man pages from here to
> release to keep them in sync? I should be able to commit most sgml
> sources for the utilities this evening; on my list of "must-haves" just
> pg_dump, pg_dumpall, and vacuum are left to do.

Yes. Good idea. Just one question. Are we sure we have all the man
page sync with the sgml? I remember Tom Lane saying there was some
stuff missing from the sgml.

> btw, is "-n" an acceptable choice for the flag? I'd be happy with
> anything, but decided that "-q" probably shouldn't be used since many
> programs use it to mean "quiet". So -n for "No quotes" is what I chose
> instead...

Seems good.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

> > And, can we be sure to update both sgml and man pages from here to
> > release to keep them in sync?
> Yes. Good idea. Just one question. Are we sure we have all the man
> page sync with the sgml? I remember Tom Lane saying there was some
> stuff missing from the sgml.

I just committed a bunch of new sgml sources covering the essential
utilities. They are based on the equivalent man pages, so we should try
to keep them in sync until after the upcoming release.

I think that Tom Lane is working on the sgml docs right now, and I saw a
commit of at least one already. I'll go ahead and remove one or two more
of the man page docs which are obsolete.

I still have to consolidate or write new info for the SERIAL, INT8, and
CIDR data types (I've got Tom H's info on CIDR, but expect to have to
move things around a bit).

btw, I'm thinking of changing the src/ and doc/ Makefiles to have the
man pages installed from the doc directory, not the src directory. So,
one would get the man pages installed by doing

% cd doc
% make install

rather than having them installed every time you install a new
executable, as currently happens. I won't move the location of the man
sources, just change the makefiles.

Comments?

- Tom