Re: Notes for DDP writers
On Mon, Feb 15, 1999 at 01:00:40PM -0500, James A. Treacy wrote:
So, I can merge the DDP pages and doc/index.wml page, and send them to you?
> > What we could now, is to create the preffered directory structure under
> > /doc/, and making a small symlink farm ( :) ) in these directories that
> > would point to the current locations of debian-doc documents.
> > That would enable all the stuff you are saying, without actual moving
> > of the HTML documents from their current locations (we'd do that later).
> >
> > Lets say first:
> >
> > /doc/ -- the toplevel index files
> > stable -- index files for 'stable' docs
> > tutorial -- index.$LANG.html -> symlink to $LANG/index.html
> > en -- \
> > fr --- language specific versions of docs
> > de -- /
> > ...
> What's the point? Why not simply put all the languages together?
Some documents are divided in several files, so I thought it would
be more convenient not having to change the names of them all, instead
just put them in another dir. But it can be done in one directory.
BTW there are no translations to debian-doc documents yet, AFAIK,
but we have to be prepared ;|
> > The documents in 'stable' directory would be picked either by the version
> > in current stable release, or by stability of the doc. We could rename
> > these to 'finished' and 'current' or something else.
> >
> > That way, when /devel/index.html would need to reference Debian Policy
> > document, then you'd point it to http://www.debian.org/doc/stable/policy
> > (or relative link), and not have to worry, since the debian-doc group
> > would actually pick the doc to put on that location(s).
> >
> Why put the development version in the Debian web space? It then gets
> unnecessarily mirrored all over which wastes bandwidth and disk space
> (some of the mirrors don't have a lot of extra space).
Some documents are much improved from the version that got released
in last 'stable'. Then you have the Debian Policy that really should
be the latest version. Besides those, there are some docs that haven't
yet been released in a 'stable'.
Also, I doubt that all these docs take *that* much space, if you include
just the HTML version.
Anyhow, we can just have the latest versions on the web. I think most
docs don't have any major showstoppers in their development versions.
> Also, what is the purpose of all the symlinks? All this can be better handled
> by CVS. Doing a 'cvs checkout /cvs/ddp/stable' (or something similar) could
> grab the stable branch. If the files needed to be further processed, that
> can be done on master.
Yes, but that means that you must generate the SGML on the fly, since
the debian-doc CVS tree contains only this format.
And that wouldn't be practical, when all the manuals' HTML versions get
generated every day, and put in one other directory (I think
va/~elphick/manuals.html/).
For now we could make a heap of symlinks, after the test period
you could delete all the symlinks in /doc, and just put one symlink,
~elphick/manuals.html -> <wherever the web is>/doc, so that the
docs get built in the place (that also requires some changes in directory
ownership).
That would also mean that we'd have to change all the Makefiles to
build in different subdirectories under ~elphick/manuals.html. Or to
have another script to rearrange the files after building, but that
would be ugly.
To the list readers: do you have any objections (hopefully better ideas)
to the directories layout laid out in my previous message?
--
enJoy -*/\*- http://jagor.srce.hr/~jrodin/
Reply to: