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

Re: wml issues, divert stuff and upgrade to wml2

On Thu, Aug 17, 2000 at 11:53:47AM -0600, Anthony Fok wrote:
> > I noticed Anthony's changes to templates made all the pages look bad under
> > wml2, so I fixed it. What I noticed later is that the change makes the pages
> > look bad under wml1. >:< We could probably avoid this problem by undoing the
> > initial changes, I guess...
> Sorry, I didn't anticipate that my changes would create problems
> for the wml2 migration ("{#mainbody:" vs. "{#mainbody#:").
> I was hoping that the "{#mainbody:" syntax is faster than "..mainbody>>",
> and that it is only a small change from that to wml_2.x's syntax.

Yeah, well, things never turn out the good way :/

> BTW, what is the plan for the migration from wml_1.7.4 to wml_2.0.x?
> e.g. timeframe, which machine (master or lully or some other?),
> anything that we should note, and anything that we could help with...

"It's all been done" :)

> > Anyway, I also noticed this in the daily build log:
> > Nine and a half hours. :(
> Where may I find the build log?  (Sorry, it is probably a FAQ... :-)

See /org/www.debian.org/cron/README on master.debian.org.

> > So I got wml 2.0.2 installed on master (hi Thing :) and am starting a
> > rebuild now. The package can be found in woody, and it installs fine on
> > potato machines. Considering everyone should be using potato nowadays
> > because it is the release named stable, this shouldn't be a problem.
> Great!  Yes, whenever you want to make the switch to WML 2.x, just
> let us know, and we'll switch right over.  :-)

:) This may be a little annoying to people still using slink etc, but the
upgrade is a good thing to do, honestly.

> Hmm... if possible, it would be really nice to have WML 2.x in
> Debian 2.2rev1.  :-)

I somehow doubt that could happen...

Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification

Reply to: