[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Installation guide is not updated in some languages



Samuel Thibault <sthibault@debian.org> (2017-06-20):
> Samuel Thibault, on lun. 19 juin 2017 23:16:09 +0200, wrote:
> The buildweb.sh script is basically just forcing 
> 
> export official_build="1" (which is set for package upload anyway)
> export web_build="1"
> export manual_target="for_wdo"
> 
> 
> The only differences are
> 
> - these links on the website:
> 
>     example preconfiguration file from <span class="phrase"><a class="ulink" href="http://www.debian.org/releases/stretch/example-preseed.txt"; target="_top">http://www.debian.org/releases/stretch/example-preseed.txt</a></span>.
> 
> which are made
> 
>     example preconfiguration file from <span class="phrase"><a class="ulink" href="../example-preseed.txt" target="_top">../example-preseed.txt</a></span>.
> 
> in the package. I'd say we can use relative links on the website as
> well.

Looks good to me, yes.

> - the link to the various formats:
> 
>     The document you are now reading, which is the official version of the
>     Installation Guide for the stretch release of Debian; available
>     in <a class="ulink" href="http://www.debian.org/releases/stretch//installmanual"; target="_top">various formats and
>     translations</a>.

(nitpick: Probably a slash too many before installmanual.)

> in the website, and 
> 
>     This document you are now reading, in plain ASCII, HTML or PDF format.
> 
>     <div class="itemizedlist"><ul class="itemizedlist" type="disc">
>     <li class="listitem"><p>
>     <a class="ulink" href="install.en.txt" target="_top">install.en.txt</a>
>     </p></li>
>     <li class="listitem"><p>
>     <a class="ulink" href="install.en.html" target="_top">install.en.html</a>
>     </p></li>
>     <li class="listitem"><p>
>     <a class="ulink" href="install.en.pdf" target="_top">install.en.pdf</a>
>     </p></li>
>     </ul></div>
> 
> in the package. The real difference is "and [various] translations".  I
> don't think this is worth making a difference between the website and
> the package?

I don't think it's required, but it might be nice to give doc/www
people a chance to voice their opinion here.


KiBi.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: