> On 28 Feb 2024, at 18:02, Nathan Bossart <nathandboss...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 02:46:11PM +0100, Daniel Gustafsson wrote: >>> On 26 Feb 2024, at 21:30, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> Nathan Bossart <nathandboss...@gmail.com> writes: >>>> I think this would be nice. If the Markdown version is reasonably readable >>>> as plain-text, maybe we could avoid maintaining two READMEs files, too. >>>> But overall, +1 to modernizing the README a bit. >>> >>> Per past track record, we change the top-level README only once every >>> three years or so, so I doubt it'd be too painful to maintain two >>> versions of it. >> >> It wont be, and we kind of already have two since there is another similar >> README displayed at https://www.postgresql.org/ftp/. That being said, a >> majority of those reading the README will likely be new developers accustomed >> to Markdown (or doing so via interfaces such as Github) so going to Markdown >> might not be a bad idea. We can also render a plain text version with pandoc >> for release builds should we want to. > > Sorry, my suggestion wasn't meant to imply that I have any strong concerns > about maintaining two README files. If we can automate generating one or > the other, that'd be great, but I don't see that as a prerequisite to > adding a Markdown version.
Agreed, and I didn't say we should do it but rather that we can do it based on the toolchain we already have. Personally I think just having a Markdown version is enough, it's become the de facto standard for such documentation for good reasons. -- Daniel Gustafsson
