Robert Treat writes:
> Would it be easier enough to modify the existing bits to generate a
> postgres tutorial extension that was distributed like the other
> contrib modules in core? This would also give existing packagers a
> simple way to make this available (or not) on their systems. Thoughts?
On Sun, Aug 10, 2025 at 11:48 AM Tom Lane wrote:
>
> "David G. Johnston" writes:
> > On Sunday, August 10, 2025, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Possibly we should reword the tutorial intro a bit, to the effect
> >> that you can follow along with the examples if you have a source
> >> tree at hand. (Sadly
"David G. Johnston" writes:
> On Sunday, August 10, 2025, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Possibly we should reword the tutorial intro a bit, to the effect
>> that you can follow along with the examples if you have a source
>> tree at hand. (Sadly, that's not going to be very many novices
>> these days.)
>
On Sunday, August 10, 2025, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>
> Possibly we should reword the tutorial intro a bit, to the effect
> that you can follow along with the examples if you have a source
> tree at hand. (Sadly, that's not going to be very many novices
> these days.)
>
I’d rather remove it from the d
"David G. Johnston" writes:
> Well, the main issue is the people who write the documentation and code the
> software only directly support installing it from source code. Third-party
> packagers take over when it comes to producing binaries. You would need to
> convince them to change their ways
On Sunday, August 10, 2025, PG Doc comments form
wrote:
>
> Fix it so that access to the tutorial (since you have it) becomes
> convenient
> for ALL people with sources, binaries, installers, archives and any other
> supplies.
>
Well, the main issue is the people who write the documentation and
