Обсуждение: Re: [DOCS] Doc fixes and improvements
Thom Brown wrote: > On 14 September 2010 17:34, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 2010-09-14 at 12:16 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote: > >> > I think a consensus needs to be reached on what you guys want > >> > changing. ?Implementing changes isn't a problem, it's what changes > >> > should be implemented. ?Whatever is decided, it needs to be easy to > >> > visually scan the page and its sections, clean and consistent. > >> > >> It seems like you're giving up just when we've just about got > >> consensus. ?Please don't. > > > > I am at a point, assuming the patch is decent, and it is consistent with > > the current website (which I will be reviewing) to commit the changes > > myself. Thom has more than enough support for the changes he has made. > > Well since I haven't seen Magnus online today, I'll attach the files > here. I've attached a complete copy of the css file, a patch version > and the javascript file. I just IM'ed with Magnus and he will be around on Friday, Sweden time, and can do the install and stuff. Thom, he said he might IM you too. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
On 15 September 2010 22:19, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > Thom Brown wrote: >> On 14 September 2010 17:34, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote: >> > On Tue, 2010-09-14 at 12:16 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: >> >> On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote: >> >> > I think a consensus needs to be reached on what you guys want >> >> > changing. ?Implementing changes isn't a problem, it's what changes >> >> > should be implemented. ?Whatever is decided, it needs to be easy to >> >> > visually scan the page and its sections, clean and consistent. >> >> >> >> It seems like you're giving up just when we've just about got >> >> consensus. ?Please don't. >> > >> > I am at a point, assuming the patch is decent, and it is consistent with >> > the current website (which I will be reviewing) to commit the changes >> > myself. Thom has more than enough support for the changes he has made. >> >> Well since I haven't seen Magnus online today, I'll attach the files >> here. I've attached a complete copy of the css file, a patch version >> and the javascript file. > > I just IM'ed with Magnus and he will be around on Friday, Sweden time, > and can do the install and stuff. Thom, he said he might IM you too. Yeah, I pinged him today but is preoccupied for most of this week, so I'll wait. :) Thanks for the info. -- Thom Brown Twitter: @darkixion IRC (freenode): dark_ixion Registered Linux user: #516935
Where are we on this? Are we getting installed for the 9.0 release? --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thom Brown wrote: > On 15 September 2010 22:19, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > > Thom Brown wrote: > >> On 14 September 2010 17:34, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote: > >> > On Tue, 2010-09-14 at 12:16 -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > >> >> On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote: > >> >> > I think a consensus needs to be reached on what you guys want > >> >> > changing. ?Implementing changes isn't a problem, it's what changes > >> >> > should be implemented. ?Whatever is decided, it needs to be easy to > >> >> > visually scan the page and its sections, clean and consistent. > >> >> > >> >> It seems like you're giving up just when we've just about got > >> >> consensus. ?Please don't. > >> > > >> > I am at a point, assuming the patch is decent, and it is consistent with > >> > the current website (which I will be reviewing) to commit the changes > >> > myself. Thom has more than enough support for the changes he has made. > >> > >> Well since I haven't seen Magnus online today, I'll attach the files > >> here. ?I've attached a complete copy of the css file, a patch version > >> and the javascript file. > > > > I just IM'ed with Magnus and he will be around on Friday, Sweden time, > > and can do the install and stuff. ?Thom, he said he might IM you too. > > Yeah, I pinged him today but is preoccupied for most of this week, so > I'll wait. :) Thanks for the info. > > -- > Thom Brown > Twitter: @darkixion > IRC (freenode): dark_ixion > Registered Linux user: #516935 -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
On 19 September 2010 03:07, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > Where are we on this? Are we getting installed for the 9.0 release? I've been meaning to grab Magnus on IRC, but haven't seen him online this weekend. Magnus, have you had a chance to look at this? -- Thom Brown Twitter: @darkixion IRC (freenode): dark_ixion Registered Linux user: #516935
On 9/19/10 1:53 AM, Thom Brown wrote:
> On 19 September 2010 03:07, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>> Where are we on this? Are we getting installed for the 9.0 release?
>
> I've been meaning to grab Magnus on IRC, but haven't seen him online
> this weekend.
>
> Magnus, have you had a chance to look at this?
He's been travelling. If I'd known you were waiting for Magnus on
this, I'd have told you.
Better to get review from Dave and Devrim today.
-- -- Josh Berkus PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://www.pgexperts.com
Josh Berkus wrote: > On 9/19/10 1:53 AM, Thom Brown wrote: > > On 19 September 2010 03:07, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > >> Where are we on this? Are we getting installed for the 9.0 release? > > > > I've been meaning to grab Magnus on IRC, but haven't seen him online > > this weekend. > > > > Magnus, have you had a chance to look at this? > > He's been travelling. If I'd known you were waiting for Magnus on > this, I'd have told you. > > Better to get review from Dave and Devrim today. It appears Magnus has applied most of Thom's changes to our live docs web site in time for 9.0. :-) Unfortunately, the fixed font javascript change does not appear to be installed. Magnus, can this be done? -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
Bruce Momjian wrote: > Josh Berkus wrote: > > On 9/19/10 1:53 AM, Thom Brown wrote: > > > On 19 September 2010 03:07, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > > >> Where are we on this? Are we getting installed for the 9.0 release? > > > > > > I've been meaning to grab Magnus on IRC, but haven't seen him online > > > this weekend. > > > > > > Magnus, have you had a chance to look at this? > > > > He's been travelling. If I'd known you were waiting for Magnus on > > this, I'd have told you. > > > > Better to get review from Dave and Devrim today. > > It appears Magnus has applied most of Thom's changes to our live docs > web site in time for 9.0. :-) Unfortunately, the fixed font javascript > change does not appear to be installed. Magnus, can this be done? FYI, the javascript was in Thom's tarball, called monospacefix.js. Perhaps it is installed but not being called. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
On 20 September 2010 04:41, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > Bruce Momjian wrote: >> Josh Berkus wrote: >> > On 9/19/10 1:53 AM, Thom Brown wrote: >> > > On 19 September 2010 03:07, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: >> > >> Where are we on this? Are we getting installed for the 9.0 release? >> > > >> > > I've been meaning to grab Magnus on IRC, but haven't seen him online >> > > this weekend. >> > > >> > > Magnus, have you had a chance to look at this? >> > >> > He's been travelling. If I'd known you were waiting for Magnus on >> > this, I'd have told you. >> > >> > Better to get review from Dave and Devrim today. >> >> It appears Magnus has applied most of Thom's changes to our live docs >> web site in time for 9.0. :-) Unfortunately, the fixed font javascript >> change does not appear to be installed. Magnus, can this be done? > > FYI, the javascript was in Thom's tarball, called monospacefix.js. > Perhaps it is installed but not being called. Hi Bruce, I discussed the javascript change with Magnus, and whilst in *theory* it won't affect the rest of the site, we deemed it safer to apply it at a later stage, and just keep the existing gecko fixes script there until the other one can be tested properly. It's only really been tested against the docs, but would be included in the general site header so would be loaded for every page on the site. The CSS it injects affects the document container so that's the "in theory" bit. But my version of the site we were using it on isn't the same as the current one as it's still under development. Once things have died down a little from the 9.0 release, I'll coax Magnus into applying that to his copy of the site and draft in people to test it both on the docs and the rest of the site. -- Thom Brown Twitter: @darkixion IRC (freenode): dark_ixion Registered Linux user: #516935
Thom Brown wrote: > I discussed the javascript change with Magnus, and whilst in *theory* > it won't affect the rest of the site, we deemed it safer to apply it > at a later stage, and just keep the existing gecko fixes script there > until the other one can be tested properly. It's only really been > tested against the docs, but would be included in the general site > header so would be loaded for every page on the site. The CSS it > injects affects the document container so that's the "in theory" bit. > But my version of the site we were using it on isn't the same as the > current one as it's still under development. > > Once things have died down a little from the 9.0 release, I'll coax > Magnus into applying that to his copy of the site and draft in people > to test it both on the docs and the rest of the site. Thanks. So, tomorrow? ;-) One issue I see is that we made fixed-width font size match proportional-width fonts in the doc javascript because we were mixing the two in the same paragraph. There might be cases where we don't mix them on the web site and might want to honor whatever size differences specified by the user. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +
On 20 September 2010 16:23, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > Thom Brown wrote: >> I discussed the javascript change with Magnus, and whilst in *theory* >> it won't affect the rest of the site, we deemed it safer to apply it >> at a later stage, and just keep the existing gecko fixes script there >> until the other one can be tested properly. It's only really been >> tested against the docs, but would be included in the general site >> header so would be loaded for every page on the site. The CSS it >> injects affects the document container so that's the "in theory" bit. >> But my version of the site we were using it on isn't the same as the >> current one as it's still under development. >> >> Once things have died down a little from the 9.0 release, I'll coax >> Magnus into applying that to his copy of the site and draft in people >> to test it both on the docs and the rest of the site. > > Thanks. So, tomorrow? ;-) Well, it's tomorrow as of yesterday... or something like that, and Magnus has kindly put those changes into his version for testing: http://magnus.webdev.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/functions-datetime.html This includes a fix to the caution and warning box titles which were a tad too small and pressed up against the top of the box. > One issue I see is that we made fixed-width font size match > proportional-width fonts in the doc javascript because we were mixing > the two in the same paragraph. There might be cases where we don't mix > them on the web site and might want to honor whatever size differences > specified by the user. Do you mean outside of the docs? If so, it shouldn't affect anything else. If you mean within the docs, I don't think varying monospace font sizes would look very consistent. But the changes are up for you to see anyway so see what you think. -- Thom Brown Twitter: @darkixion IRC (freenode): dark_ixion Registered Linux user: #516935
Thom Brown wrote: > On 20 September 2010 16:23, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote: > > Thom Brown wrote: > >> I discussed the javascript change with Magnus, and whilst in *theory* > >> it won't affect the rest of the site, we deemed it safer to apply it > >> at a later stage, and just keep the existing gecko fixes script there > >> until the other one can be tested properly. ?It's only really been > >> tested against the docs, but would be included in the general site > >> header so would be loaded for every page on the site. ?The CSS it > >> injects affects the document container so that's the "in theory" bit. > >> But my version of the site we were using it on isn't the same as the > >> current one as it's still under development. > >> > >> Once things have died down a little from the 9.0 release, I'll coax > >> Magnus into applying that to his copy of the site and draft in people > >> to test it both on the docs and the rest of the site. > > > > Thanks. ?So, tomorrow? ?;-) > > Well, it's tomorrow as of yesterday... or something like that, and > Magnus has kindly put those changes into his version for testing: > http://magnus.webdev.postgresql.org/docs/8.3/static/functions-datetime.html > > This includes a fix to the caution and warning box titles which were a > tad too small and pressed up against the top of the box. You know, if my nagging didn't produce results, I might stop doing it. ;-) Looks perfect to me in both large and normal font sizes. Very polished! FYI, I was reading the Slashdot comments about our 9.0 release and there were several comments about how good our documentation is, including the new appearance for 9.0. I will blog about it today. > > One issue I see is that we made fixed-width font size match > > proportional-width fonts in the doc javascript because we were mixing > > the two in the same paragraph. ?There might be cases where we don't mix > > them on the web site and might want to honor whatever size differences > > specified by the user. > > Do you mean outside of the docs? If so, it shouldn't affect anything > else. If you mean within the docs, I don't think varying monospace > font sizes would look very consistent. I thought you said it would affect things beyond the docs, but I was obviously wrong. Great job team! -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. +