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

Re: potato release notes missing

On Fri, Aug 18, 2000 at 04:27:14PM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote:
> > I disagree, it's useful, having directories without index.html is bad.
> I deny it is actually useful.  All of its information is more
> completely and clearly stated at
> http://www.debian.org/releases/potato/index.*.html.

That page references ${arch}/. If we remove that link, then we could remove
the ${arch}/index.html files, too... nothing else links there AFAICT.

> Inaccurate and incomplete information (translations missing) is worse
> than none.

When translations are missing, the english version gets displayed.

> > If we put that in webwml, that means creating one dir per architecture, with
> > a Makefile and an index.wml file. Aside from the cruftiness issue :) the
> > problem is that other arches will most probably get out of sync with i386.
> > If they're generated from a single source, that's less likely to happen.
> Actually, if this is solely for the web site, and you *really* want
> this, then it would be quite easy to do it in WML without adding to
> the maintenance burder, since it could share the same functions that
> generate the documentation matrix on
> http://www.debian.org/releases/potato/index.*.html.

It's still five subdirs...

> Another alternative is to redir from someone try to do a dir listing
> at http://www.debian.org/releases/potato/arch or
> http://www.debian.org/releases/potato/arch/<arches> to
> http://www.debian.org/releases/potato/.

Redirections are done thought apache's httpd.conf files, right? If so, we
can't do it, the mirrors won't have it.

Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification

Reply to: