Re: Plan for DDP
On Sat, Feb 14, 2004 at 10:15:56PM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 13, 2004 at 10:14:02PM +0100, Francesco Paolo Lovergine wrote:
> >
> > Sincerely, I do not understand at all the need to have an weekly
> > html edition of the development cvs, but probably it's my failure.
>
> 1.- Some of the documents are _only_ published in htlm form.
So they are already published in the cvs
> 2.- Users running stable cannot retrieve the latest version of the
> documents installing new packages. Also, packages with documents might not
> contain translations in some languages.
True, but hopefully documents should generally be up-to-date in respect to
unstable, not stable, that's quite confusing for naive users.
> 3.- The website is the only place were all documentation is published, it's
> not available in the FTP mirrors, even.
>
> And it's not necessarily the _development_ CVS, stable documents which are
> updated from time to time (once a month? typo fixes? new translations?) are
> also published using the same mechanism.
>
Mmm, probably we should consider the same sort of maintainance we have
for point releases in stable (and so branching cvs whenever needed).
Anyway, sure: at the current state we have not a better management, so having
up-to-date docs is a requirement.
> That's why I value the CVS to html transition so much. For some users, it's
> the only contact they really have with some of the documentation
> that Debian produces.
>
Ok, I was a bit biased by developers point of view.
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
Reply to: