> > The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
> >
> > Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/history.html
> > Description:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > In https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/history.html it is written
> "With
> > over two decades of development behind it".
>
On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 01:47:16PM -0700, Kirk Parker wrote:
> > The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
> >
> > Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/history.html
> > Description:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > In https://www.postgresql.org/docs/
> On 22/06/2023 23:00 CEST Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 01:47:16PM -0700, Kirk Parker wrote:
> >
> > I don't suppose DocBook has macro and system-variable capabilities? That
> > could provide a set-and-forget solution to this?
>
> Uh, I am not aware of any.
An SGML entity [0]
On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 03:17:26AM +0200, Erik Wienhold wrote:
> An SGML entity [0] or an xsltproc stringparam [1] looks viable. Question is
> how to calculate the number of decades in the Makefile. It's trivial in SQL
> :)
- University of California at Berkeley. With over two decades of
+ U
Michael Paquier writes:
> "With multiple decades of development behind it, PostgreSQL.."
+1. It sure seems silly trying to automate changing this.
regards, tom lane
On 6/22/23 9:23 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Michael Paquier writes:
"With multiple decades of development behind it, PostgreSQL.."
+1. It sure seems silly trying to automate changing this.
+1. With the proposed language, we can revisit it once it gets to
"centuries."
Jonathan
OpenPGP_signatu
