On Tue, Jul 27, 2004 at 12:44:25PM -0500, Thomas F.O'Connell wrote:
> Regardless, if slonik is the interface to the stored procedures that is 
> distributed as part of Slony, shouldn't its limitations be noted and 
> eventually addressed?
> 
> I'm happy to play a limited role in the development process, as long as 
> I can actually contribute rather than getting in over my head in terms 
> of Slony code.

Well, you could document it ;-)  I think the Slony system's
documentation is clearly currently somewhat underwhelming.  I think
this will improve much after Jan's Slony workshop in Portland OR on
Sat, because it'll provide some fodder for docs.  But we still have
to write the docs.  I know Chris has been working on some, and Jan
too.  Maybe now is a good time to concentrate on that.

One thing that I heard today at OSCON, which was _extremely_ good,
was Greg Sabino Mullane's talk on making developers and DBAs play
nicely.  In there, he has a nice set of rules about documenting the
internal functions and such that one adds to a database.  I think
Slony might benefit from this strategy, so in the next week or two,
I'll try to prise out enough time to make a serious proposal.  Greg's
presentation slides aren't up yet, but he said they'd be available at
www.gtsm.com eventually.

A


-- 
Andrew Sullivan  | ajs at crankycanuck.ca
This work was visionary and imaginative, and goes to show that visionary
and imaginative work need not end up well. 
		--Dennis Ritchie