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

Re: use doc-base not dwww for doco pkgs (was Re: menu system)

Jim Pick <jim@jimpick.com> writes:
> Adam Di Carlo <apharris@burrito.onshore.com> writes:
>> Even the dwww maintainer, AFAIK, advocates doc-base rather than


>> using dwww menu files directly.  Plus they have a nicer syntax.
>> Plus I have big plans for an RDF metadata repository once we get
>> slink out the door and I get some breathing room again.

> I'll second that.  :-)

> Dwww is undergoing a rewrite (too late for slink, unfortunately).  I
> haven't played around much with doc-base yet, but I think that's
> definitely the way to go.

Jim, note that it's unfortunately also too late for hamm and rex.

It was many, many moons ago when you told me that you had
fantastic ideas with dwww, and and that the menuentry syntax
was too limited for your ideas. However, all that time (I think
over a year, maybe even more) you have been unable to answer my
questions as to _what_ limitations there are in the menuentry
syntax that you want to get rid of. And, unless I miss something,
nothing has happened on the dwww front.

Also, note that if you don't like the html files (and structure)
generated by the /etc/menu-methods/dwww file, then that's your
problem. I've got (and I think also sent to you) menu-method dwww scripts
that generate much nicer www trees etc.

That's one advantage of menu: local users/sysadm can completely 
rearrange the way the www pages (and the whole tree) looks.

For the rest I'm not very much into dwww. The only reason I
post here so negatively is because I'm somewhat disappointed by
your year-long-promise to completely rewrite dwww `very soon now'.
And because you see limitations in menu that you don't want
to describe.

Sorry if I seem harsh. Wasn't intended that way.


Reply to: