Re: Bug#646283: git-buildpackage documentation is not available on www.d.o
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 11:10:24PM -0400, David Prévot wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
> Hi Guido, debian-doc and debian-www,
> Le 22/10/2011 18:10, Toni Müller a écrit :
> > on the named page, found here:
> > http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/build.en.html
> > there is a link with a file:// URL, which is illegal in this
> > context.
> > I tried to poke around w.d.o a bit to find a link that would have been
> > something like
> > w.d.o/...gbp.html
No, I meant it to be file://...
If you are using Debian (which I expect for reader for maint-guide), you
can install package to your system and read it using epiphany as browser as
(I know some browser like chromium does not allow local file link ...
probably to protect people.)
> Sure, the git-buildpackage documentation is not (yet) shipped in the
> website, and the online copy  doesn't seems to be automatically updated.
> 0: http://honk.sigxcpu.org/projects/git-buildpackage/manual-html/gbp.html
> Guido, do you intend to maintain an online and up to date copy of the
> git-buildpackage documentation somewhere?
I do not think this is scalable idea. But having documentation pages of
packaged softwares to be exposed to the public itself is interesting
> What does the documentation team think about shipping this documentation
> in the doc part of the website, if Guido agrees?
If we do this, we should design this welll. Fundamental questions are.
* How should we manage DDP on Debian web server and DDP contents?
* What is the best web documentation resource arrangement now?
* How do we split role with semi-static DDP page and Wiki page?
My thoughts are:
* CVS+DDP build was good way to be current.
* XML/SGML + PO4A, internationalization is very good.
* unstable package build environment is usually better than DDP
* Pakage and web page build difference is annoying sometimes and what
we want now is more like /usr/share/doc/<packagename> contents.
* Already grown into more resourceful than DDP for *current* issues.
* Easy entry with quick result => current content better than SVN
* Contents can get messy
* translation synching is not best but getting better.
If we can publish all the documentation contents on the web with stable
URL exposed via something similar to the dhelp or dwww consistently, it
will be nice. (There are some measures needed for transition.)
In order to avoid package conflict issue of actual installation, we may
need to install only documentation contents of packages files with
> Would the web team agree? (I can take care of the shipping if none
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----