Re: Notes for DDP writers
On Tue, 16 Feb 1999 12:36:28 +0100, Josip Rodin <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> On Mon, Feb 15, 1999 at 05:45:56PM -0500, Adam Di Carlo wrote:
>> You should take a closer look at DDP's manuals.sgml Makefile
>> system. It was designed for people to be able to tweak a single
>> variable, which can be set on the command line, and install all the
>> files into subdirectories on any given prefix.
> That is how generally Makefiles operate, isn't it? Like, `make
> CFLAGS=-O12` and all the lower level makefiles will do the same.
>> There certainly *are* translations of most of the documents in the
>> DDP area, at least, the mature documents. They are simply
>> uncollected at this point, which is a big problem.
> No, it is not a problem. It is nothing :'< I didn't even knew that
> there are :(
Well, I think whoever puts together the DDP/www.debian.org pages
should collect the translations and put them in the right place.
Optimally, we could keep the SGML in the DDP cvs area; eventually we
should be looking to break out language-independant parts of the SGML,
i.e., in entities, like I do with the boot-floppies installation
document. Thats my HO, of course.
>> I agree with JT that we should only put *officially* released info
>> under www.debian.org/doc/
> How would you define officially? Just the documents that were
> released with hamm (at the moment, soon that'll be slink), and these
> versions? If so, that removes any need to use DDP's current
I think I disagree. For one, the only facility for this is the
'byhand' entries in the changes file. I don't think it's really
appropriate or a good idea to populate all the DDP/www.debian.org
pages this way. Another reason this isn't such a good idea is that
the people who handle Incoming is ftp-admin, now wwwmasters.
I propose we just do 'make PREFIX=/org/www.debian.org/doc/manuals
developers-reference' when, say, the developers-reference package is
released, i.e., just do it manually at the proper time.
I wish I could think of a even better way...
> JT just needs to unpack the appropriate .debs in right
> places and that is it. Presuming, that we have .debs for the
> official documents, do we?
Well, in some cases we do; in cases where we don't, and we should.
Packaging up documentation .debs is easy -- I'd be glad to help here
where we can.
> Then I propose that $(www.debian.org)/doc/maint-guide gets removed
> from that location, since it wouldn't belong there.
Well, I guess that depends on whether we really feel that *only*
packaged docs be in the DDP/www.debian.org pages.
>> The point is not to create more work. Think about the folks who
>> have to maintain this stuff for years....
> Explain this - what maintaining, work for webmasters or for authors
> of the documents?
I'm thinking of ftpmaster and webmasters. And DDP masters.
> All of it would work instantly? Then why didn't anyone come to this
Well, we planned it to work. The reason it hasn't been done is simply
that Oliver hasn't done it and no one else has stepped up. Wanna step
>> Leave cvs:ddp/webpages as is and do *not* try to shim them into the
> Most of its contents will be incorporated in /doc/index.wml, anyhow,
> or do we wish just to do this, and not point anyone to the new
> locations? :)
Well, I think we still want the DDP developer pages with the nightly
autobuild and source access, but also the "official"
DDP/www.debian.org pages for "released" (whatever that means)
BTW, do you know WML pretty well? Maybe you could help me out a bit
on an unrelated issue?
.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onShore.com.....<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>