Not an error but a difficult wording
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/sourcerepo.html
Description:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/sourcerepo.html
I was convinced that there was a missing word or something in
"because the files that these tools are used to build are included in the
tarball"
I had to read this several times, until I saw that it was actually
correct.
Maybe this would be better? (I don't know the comma rules)
"because the files(,?) that are generated/processed by these tools(,?) are
already included in the tarball"
On Wed, 2023-01-25 at 08:22 +0000, PG Doc comments form wrote:
The following documentation comment has been logged on the website:
Page: https://www.postgresql.org/docs/15/sourcerepo.html
Description:https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/sourcerepo.html
I was convinced that there was a missing word or something in
"because the files that these tools are used to build are included in the
tarball"
I had to read this several times, until I saw that it was actually
correct.Maybe this would be better? (I don't know the comma rules)
"because the files(,?) that are generated/processed by these tools(,?) are
already included in the tarball"
+1
Correct English would be:
These tools are not needed to build from a distribution tarball, because
the files generated by these tools are included in the tarball.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> writes:
On Wed, 2023-01-25 at 08:22 +0000, PG Doc comments form wrote:
Maybe this would be better? (I don't know the comma rules)
"because the files(,?) that are generated/processed by these tools(,?) are
already included in the tarball"
+1
Correct English would be:
These tools are not needed to build from a distribution tarball, because
the files generated by these tools are included in the tarball.
The existing wording is not incorrect AFAICS, but I agree it's a bit
awkward. I'd modify one word in your version:
These tools are not needed to build from a distribution tarball, because
the files generated using these tools are included in the tarball.
Or possibly "with" instead of "using"?
regards, tom lane
On Wed, 2023-01-25 at 20:39 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> writes:
On Wed, 2023-01-25 at 08:22 +0000, PG Doc comments form wrote:
Maybe this would be better? (I don't know the comma rules)
"because the files(,?) that are generated/processed by these tools(,?) are
already included in the tarball"+1
Correct English would be:
These tools are not needed to build from a distribution tarball, because
the files generated by these tools are included in the tarball.The existing wording is not incorrect AFAICS, but I agree it's a bit
awkward.
I meant "a correct version of what was suggested in the mail", not that
the released text was incorrect.
I'd modify one word in your version:
These tools are not needed to build from a distribution tarball, because
the files generated using these tools are included in the tarball.Or possibly "with" instead of "using"?
Both are better; I'd lean towards "with".
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> writes:
On Wed, 2023-01-25 at 20:39 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
I'd modify one word in your version:
These tools are not needed to build from a distribution tarball, because
the files generated using these tools are included in the tarball.Or possibly "with" instead of "using"?
Both are better; I'd lean towards "with".
Done that way then, thanks.
regards, tom lane