On Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 10:52:19AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> > Am Donnerstag, 16. Februar 2006 02:50 schrieb Tom Lane:
> >> That's fine for users, but what new demands are you about to place on
> >> developers? Does this require tools not already needed in order to
> >> build from a CVS pull? (There's sure no xsltproc on this machine...)
>
> > It is to be expected that sooner or later we'll move from SGML to XML
> > documentation builds, at which point xsltproc will become a semi-requirement
> > anyway. I don't think this requirement is too onerous; libxslt is portable
> > and easy to install.
>
> Forgot to mention, but: I don't find the above argument very convincing.
> The buildfarm machines are not expected to build documentation, and many
> developers seem not to have installed doc tools either. So I think this
> would be raising the bar another notch in terms of what's required to do
> development or testing, even if it does overlap with docs-build needs.
From what I've seen it's not terribly difficult to install some sort of
XSLT processor now-a-days. It's certainly less involved than installing
docbook in any case.
--
Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com
Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117
vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461