Re: documentation which is now officially listed as 'stalled'
In article <199811150800.IAA20706@linda.lfix.co.uk>, "Oliver Elphick" <olly@lfix.co.uk> writes:
> Adam Di Carlo wrote:
>> I feel that a DDP (and <URL:http://www.debian.org/devel/>, while
>> we're at it) which is permeated with stale documents not so marked
>> gives the whole DDP the appearance of turpitude and staleness.
>>
>> Also, for documentation which is actually not maintained via DDP,
>> I've fixed or disabled the linkages and removed it from the
>> autobuild system.
> Thank you, Adam. That is a job that has long needed doing.
Speaking of which, I fixed the autobuild system and shoved in
makefiles for all the non-dead document directories under
manuals.sgml, as you may have noticied. BTW, the standard.makefile is
used unchanged for all of them!
BTW, if anyone's curious, I also changed the manuals.sgml autobuild
system so that (theoretically) you can install HTML versions of the
manuals *anywhere* you want. It allows you to override PUBLISHDIR in
the individual document directories. Not tested!
>> Alright, here's the list of packages I so marked as stalled.
> ...
>> * Debian Tips --- we should just reap this one; it's not going to
>> happen. I mean, shouldn't it be part of the admin or user's manual
>> or FAQ anyhow?
> Tips are provided by the FAQ-O-MATIC. However, I understand that
> the FAQ-O-MATIC can only be accessed online. Can its new maintainer
> consider extracting the various data and publishing them as a
> package for those whose net access is expensive?
Hmm. The cvs package, upstream, comes with dumps from a FAQ-O-Matic,
I think. So it can be done.
--
.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onShore.com.....<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>
Reply to: