Re: RFC: why are we now doing all-lang-docs for "make docs"?
On Thu, Apr 06, 2000 at 09:34:28AM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote:
> Ben Collins <email@example.com> writes:
> > Thanks. I still think for woody that we can probably try to find some way
> > of setting up the docs so that we don't have to make all langs for all
> > archs (footnotes/attachments or whatever, for the arch specific stuff).
> You realize, right, that the 'make docs' we're not making for all
> arches but simply all langs.
Yeah, but each arch does all langs for it's boot-floppies upload. So the
total is what I was refering to.
> > Should save a good deal of space and probably well worth the reorg.
> > Wont happen in potato though. Too much that will need retranslation.
> I'm skeptical. The space/disk requirements are not trivial, yet,
> taking up disk is better than confusing new users.
It can most likely be done, if things are layed out properly, so it does
not confuse the users. In fact, it may be easier to maintain aswell. I
know from my experience trying to update the sparc docs, it was very
difficult to go through and see where things needed to be updated, aswell
as where things needed to be added. Things just have to be broken down
When that time comes (well after potato release, when I have some time),
I'll do a formal sample layout, and submit it before approval.
/ Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \
` firstname.lastname@example.org -- email@example.com -- firstname.lastname@example.org '