My SGML build fixed
My 5-minute SGML build is now working again. The URL's are at the
bottom of the developers page.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
Bruce Momjian wrote:
My 5-minute SGML build is now working again. The URL's are at the
bottom of the developers page.
Why do we need two builds anyway?
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
My 5-minute SGML build is now working again. The URL's are at the
bottom of the developers page.Why do we need two builds anyway?
Good question --- historically, the SGML build on postgresql.org was
often broken, sometimes for months, and the build isn't frequent enough
for someone to commit an SGML change, then quickly view a new build to
see if errors were introduced.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073Bruce Momjian wrote:
Good question --- historically, the SGML build on postgresql.org was
often broken, sometimes for months, and the build isn't frequent
enough for someone to commit an SGML change, then quickly view a new
build to see if errors were introduced.
Wow, that must be ancient history.
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
My 5-minute SGML build is now working again. The URL's are at
the bottom of the developers page.Why do we need two builds anyway?
Good question --- historically, the SGML build on postgresql.org was
often broken, sometimes for months, and the build isn't frequent
enough for someone to commit an SGML change, then quickly view a new
build to see if errors were introduced.
All of this has obviously not been true for a long time, so I repeat my
question.
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Bruce Momjian wrote:
My 5-minute SGML build is now working again. The URL's are at
the bottom of the developers page.Why do we need two builds anyway?
Good question --- historically, the SGML build on postgresql.org was
often broken, sometimes for months, and the build isn't frequent
enough for someone to commit an SGML change, then quickly view a new
build to see if errors were introduced.All of this has obviously not been true for a long time, so I repeat my
question.
How often does the postgresql.org site build the SGML files? And just
last week the News build failed because it lost execution bits. I still
don't trust dynamic content on postgresql.org to work reliably.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
-On [20031218 01:22], Bruce Momjian (pgman@candle.pha.pa.us) wrote:
How often does the postgresql.org site build the SGML files? And just
last week the News build failed because it lost execution bits. I still
don't trust dynamic content on postgresql.org to work reliably.
It can work, you just need somebody who is willing to look after the
entire process and not just do it every once in a while.
--
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(at)wxs.nl> / asmodai / kita no mono
PGP fingerprint: 2D92 980E 45FE 2C28 9DB7 9D88 97E6 839B 2EAC 625B
http://www.tendra.org/ | http://diary.in-nomine.org/
When I see beings of wicked nature, pressed by violent sin and affliction,
may I hold these rare ones dear as if I had found a precious treasure...
Bruce Momjian writes:
How often does the postgresql.org site build the SGML files?
Whenever something changes.
And just
last week the News build failed because it lost execution bits.
Uh, so? Your reasoning is that because some unrelated program on an
unrelated machine breaks, we should abandon all work on all programs on
machines in the the DNS domain?
I still
don't trust dynamic content on postgresql.org to work reliably.
Well, if something doesn't work, please help fixing it rather than
duplicating it. Your build breaks just as often as anything else.
(Remember last week.) And I want to know when the postgresql.org build
was ever broken in the last two years.
Right now it just seems like a waste of resources and it confuses the
onlookers.
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Bruce Momjian writes:
How often does the postgresql.org site build the SGML files?
Whenever something changes.
How often does the SGML check, or is it tied into CVS commit and happens
automatically?
And just
last week the News build failed because it lost execution bits.Uh, so? Your reasoning is that because some unrelated program on an
unrelated machine breaks, we should abandon all work on all programs on
machines in the the DNS domain?
It means there is still too much instability in the running processes on
those machines, yea.
I still
don't trust dynamic content on postgresql.org to work reliably.Well, if something doesn't work, please help fixing it rather than
duplicating it. Your build breaks just as often as anything else.
(Remember last week.) And I want to know when the postgresql.org build
was ever broken in the last two years.
It broke because the style sheet requirements changed, not because
something on my machine broke. Yes, mine has broken in the past too,
but I don't see a problem with too builds.
Right now it just seems like a waste of resources and it confuses the
onlookers.
OK, you still haven't told me how often the postgresql.org build runs.
If it is frequent enough, we can remove my link and re-add it if
postgresql.org breaks again.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073Bruce Momjian writes:
How often does the SGML check,
5 minutes
It means there is still too much instability in the running processes on
those machines, yea.
Oops, then we better hurry and get the CVS repository and the mailing
lists off these machines.
"Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
Right now it just seems like a waste of resources and it confuses the
onlookers.
If Bruce is willing to expend the resources, what's the problem?
I kinda like having some redundancy in this service, myself.
regards, tom lane
Tom Lane wrote:
"Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
Right now it just seems like a waste of resources and it confuses
the onlookers.If Bruce is willing to expend the resources, what's the problem?
I kinda like having some redundancy in this service, myself.
Bruce said he does it because postgresql.org is regularly broken. To
that I say, fix it. If he says he does it out of joy, then I don't
care.
However, maybe we should structure the developer website listing
differently, such as
Development version of the documentation
* Mirror 0
* Mirror 1
so onlookers see that they are two more or less identical versions of
the same service.
Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
However, maybe we should structure the developer website listing
differently, such as
Development version of the documentation
* Mirror 0
* Mirror 1
so onlookers see that they are two more or less identical versions of
the same service.
That seems reasonable to me.
regards, tom lane
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Bruce Momjian writes:
How often does the SGML check,
5 minutes
It means there is still too much instability in the running processes on
those machines, yea.Oops, then we better hurry and get the CVS repository and the mailing
lists off these machines.
2003 is not the year to be touting the reliability of our postgresql.org
servers --- previous years, yes, but not 2003.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
"Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
Right now it just seems like a waste of resources and it confuses
the onlookers.If Bruce is willing to expend the resources, what's the problem?
I kinda like having some redundancy in this service, myself.Bruce said he does it because postgresql.org is regularly broken. To
that I say, fix it. If he says he does it out of joy, then I don't
care.However, maybe we should structure the developer website listing
differently, such asDevelopment version of the documentation
* Mirror 0
* Mirror 1so onlookers see that they are two more or less identical versions of
the same service.
After too many emails, I now know that the official builds are now every
5 minutes, rather than every few hours which is what used to happen, so
I see my build isn't needed anymore. If you want to list it as a
mirror, that is fine, or you can remove it completely and we can re-add
it in case it is needed later.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Bruce Momjian writes:
How often does the SGML check,
5 minutes
It means there is still too much instability in the running processes on
those machines, yea.Oops, then we better hurry and get the CVS repository and the mailing
lists off these machines.2003 is not the year to be touting the reliability of our postgresql.org
servers --- previous years, yes, but not 2003.
Nope, first half sucked the big one ... I'd be first to admit it ... but
second half has been infinitely better :)
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org)
Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Bruce Momjian writes:
How often does the SGML check,
5 minutes
It means there is still too much instability in the running processes on
those machines, yea.Oops, then we better hurry and get the CVS repository and the mailing
lists off these machines.2003 is not the year to be touting the reliability of our postgresql.org
servers --- previous years, yes, but not 2003.Nope, first half sucked the big one ... I'd be first to admit it ... but
second half has been infinitely better :)
Very true! :-)
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073OK, I have updated the developer's page to list my doc build as a
sub-bullet under the official build.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
"Peter Eisentraut" <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
Right now it just seems like a waste of resources and it confuses
the onlookers.If Bruce is willing to expend the resources, what's the problem?
I kinda like having some redundancy in this service, myself.Bruce said he does it because postgresql.org is regularly broken. To
that I say, fix it. If he says he does it out of joy, then I don't
care.However, maybe we should structure the developer website listing
differently, such asDevelopment version of the documentation
* Mirror 0
* Mirror 1so onlookers see that they are two more or less identical versions of
the same service.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073