Re: To doc or not to doc, that's the question. (long RFC)
Christian Schwarz wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Sep 1997, Fabrizio Polacco wrote:
> > There is a precise relation between documentation and the current
> > distribution: "documentation" is always "stable".
> Sorry, I don't get your point. "Debian-2.0" is currently not stable
> and so will be Debian 2.1 when 2.0 has been released. I thought your
> initial idea was to make some documentations independent of "stable",
> "unstable", etc.
Yes, but absolute independence is an impossible goal.
actually all docs depends on the distribution/snapshop in which they
are. My proposal was to limit this into a singular dependency on the
Thus I said "docs are always stable".
We could put the tree even in the <dist>/stable dir or on a higher level
(I prefer the former because it permits to have exceptions: docs
depending on unstable); it's not so important.
even source is deep inside the tree, but go on a separate cd; the same
> I think this is an intresting ideas for all manuals/magazines/etc.
> (i.e. documentation :) that's independent of the Debian distribution,
> for example the nice (german) HTML introduction (selfhtml) or Linux
It is. But I prefere to put more attention in keeping docs up-to-date.
that's the goal. The rest is "gratis" :-)
| firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org
| Pluto Leader - Debian Developer & Happy Debian 1.3.1 User - vi-holic
| 6F7267F5 fingerprint 57 16 C4 ED C9 86 40 7B 1A 69 A1 66 EC FB D2 5E
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
email@example.com . Trouble?
e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org .