Re: scope creep in DDP Policy
Osamu Aoki <osamu@debian.org> writes:
> After some research, I found that the situation over "which documents
> shall be covered by DDP?" is not too bad. Anyway corresponding sections
> in manuals.sgml needs update as follows to match new scope for Policy
> Proposal:
Excellent work. Worthy of going on my revised scope branch.
> <item>(**) are provided by the Debian Policy List
> <email>debian-policy@lists.debian.org</email>.
> Policy Proposal will not enforce rules to these at this moment but will
> try to invite them into new DDP infrastructure.
> <item>(***) are provided by the corresponding package.
> Policy Proposal will not enforce rules to these at this moment but will
> try to invite them into new DDP infrastructure.
Yes yes yes! I would even suggest making the ** and *** packages
into a separate list of packages which are potentially DDP
documentation, but not currently.
>
> Please note I am removing
> "Debian Guide"
> "The Debian Linux User's Guide"
> "The Linux Cookbook"
> "Linux Magazines"
> since these are online versions of printed books, provided by their
> authors and the packagers. DDP will not edit them. Also "Linux
> Magazines" is not Debian specific. I consider them to be "contrib" type
> of documents which we thank but are not ready to claim control on them
> as a part of DDP. If any one of the author would like to be included, I
> am happy.
Agreed. Never should have been on the list at all, IMHO.
I've added a ddp-policy tag, "ddp_rescope_draft". Just do this to use
the tag in ddp-policy dir: 'cvs -q up -r ddp_rescope_draft'.
Osamu Aoki, do you want to go ahead and commit these changes to that
branch?
> Repeat:
> All translations of DDP documents must be covered by DDP new Policy
> Proposal.
I would agree with that.
> Reminder:
> If current Policy Proposal is successful, we will consider to attack
> following issues:
> 1. Maintenance of Policy Documents
> (including some core Debian Documents such as DSFG)
> 2. Translation frame work
Yes, to wit, a general translation synchrony checker and differ. See
the developers-reference one for a possible start point.
> 3. Packaging coordination
> 4. Style of package for package specific documentation.
> (-doc, -docs, doc-..., include SGML in binary or not.)
> 5. ... Plug any concern here :-)
Here's more. We don't need to wait for ddp policy to be done to start
on these.
. better makefiles, possibly a makefile inclusion system?
. makefile for docbook-xml documents
. XSL default style for docbook-xml documents
. possible integration of the www.debian.org/doc (webml) stuff
with the DDP cvs area
. working with ftp maintainers to get ddp published on ftp site
(are we using some sort of tags
--
...Adam Di Carlo..<adam@onshore-devel.com>...<URL:http://www.onshored.com/>
Reply to: