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

Re: documentation which is now officially listed as 'stalled'



Adam Di Carlo <apharris@burrito.onshore.com> writes:

> In article <87ww4xuj62.fsf@flevonet.nl>, Ardo van Rangelrooij <avrangel@flevonet.nl> writes:
[snip]
> > I'm not sure I agree the guidelines should be incorporated.  These
> > have nothing to do with the debiandoc-sgml itself, but more with how
> > the documentation should be written (for instance, using
> > debiandoc-sgml).  If we switch to another DTD and/or set of tools,
> > the guidelines should still be applicable.
> 
> Good point... we need a maintainer.

Why don't we follow the same approach as with the Debian Policy Manual,
i.e. a team of maintainers?

> BTW, what Craig suggested on Debian Policy is good.  In other words,
> (from IRC):
> 
> <craig> You may at some point want to definea debiandoc architecture, of
>  | while the debiandoc DTD is a perfect implementation, but allow translation
>  | from other DTDs
> 
> I think this would be really cool; you could write debiandoc documents
> in docbook or whatever...  See

<nag>
This will then also put an end to the reoccurring "why not DocBook" issue.
</nag>
(Ok, go ahead, shoot me for this remark.)

Seriously, this would be great.

Talking about architecture:  How are things in the Debian Meta Documentation
Data world?

> <URL:http://www.isogen.com/papers/archintro.html> for details. Anyhow,
> something for a rainy day.

Maybe you should consider moving to the Netherlands.  Plenty of rainy
days in the last few months.

> > Integrating the "How to get started ..." is a good idea.  I've
> > already copied the ddsample.ta.gz as well as printed the proposed
> > TOC.  I was already planning on extending the debiandoc-sgml manual,
> > so this might be a good starting point.
> 
> Ok, I'll note this...  
> 
> Oliver, please go ahead and nuke the 'How to get started' and loose
> tarballs, I think... right, Ardo?  You got all you need?

Yep!

> Ardo, one other point.  I was considering writing up a little section,
> 'how to use debian/changelog for automatic date and versioning'.  Do
> you think this would be good?

You mean for in the markup manual?  Yeah, sure, no problem.  Sounds
interesting.  Maybe we could also discuss a new setup of the manual?

[snip]
> >> * Debiandoc-SGML Markup Manual
> 
> > Although not maintained within the DDP CVS are, it probably still
> > would be nice to have it on the pages, together with the gidelines
> > (see above).  Maybe we simply have to put it under the DDP CVS
> > instance so I can update it when a new release of debiandoc-sgml is
> > done.
> 
> If you want to do this, that would be great.  If it's going to slow
> you down, don't bother.  I'd be happy to help with the initial import
> of the data, or moving it from cvs area to another if you use cvs
> locally.

It's no problem to keep the DDP CVS instance up to date.  It'll just
be another upload.  It would be great if you could do the initial
import.  And yes, I have all the package sources locally under CVS (of
course).  So, how do we proceed?  I didn't quite understand the part
of moving the CVS area.  

Thanks,

Ardo
-- 
Ardo van Rangelrooij
home email: avrangel@flevonet.nl, ardo@debian.org
home page:  http://www.tip.nl/users/ardo.van.rangelrooij
PGP fp:     3B 1F 21 72 00 5C 3A 73  7F 72 DF D9 90 78 47 F9


Reply to: