> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Eisentraut [mailto:peter_e@gmx.net]
> Sent: 23 April 2004 10:57
> To: Dave Page; Raphaël Enrici; pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org
> Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] [Fwd: Re: Bug#245310:
> pgadmin3-data: pgadmin3 ships duplicate of PostgreSQL]
>
>
> It seems to me that they are index files of some kind that
> are generated by automatic means from the various HTML
> documentation files.
No, that's exactly what they are not (if you see what I mean!). Someone has started a project in the HW and added each
ofthe HTML files in the pg docs. They have then manually created index entries and a browsable treeview index. There is
nothingautomatic about it (unfortunately).
> The fact that they can also be edited
> by hand does not mean that they can reasonably count as
> source code.
They are the source code to a Compiled HTML Help file. Call them project files if you don't like the term 'source', but
theyare used to build a binary file. It gets confusing because on *nix we don't actually use the .chm file - instead,
thewxWindows help system reads the index and html files directly.
> (You can also edit binary object files or
> Postscript files by hand.)
Maybe, but you couldn't easily author one from scratch. The files in question can be easily written from scratch (have
alook at them, they're quite simple). The HW is no more required than the class wizard in VC++ used when writing an MFC
application- it just make life a lot simpler.
BTW, as the local DocBook expert (iirc) if you have any ideas about how these files could be autogenerated from the
SGMLsource, I'd love to hear them.
> Don't get me wrong, it's up to you how you develop your
> software. I'm just pointing out these issues before the
> Debian license police finds them and rips out the package.
No, it's good to work out these issues no matter whose opinion proves the most accepted (I'll refrain from saying right
orwrong) - thanks for raising them.
Regards, Dave.