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

Re: Notes for DDP writers

On Tue, 16 Feb 1999 12:36:28 +0100, Josip Rodin <joy@cibalia.gkvk.hr> 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
> resources.

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
> before?

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
>> website.

> 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/>

Reply to: