Hi Boris, Just for clarification. The Forrest system is mostly a superset of what stylebook provides. The irritating part is the index file organization has changed - otherwise it would simply be a perl script to change the sb tag names to forrest tag names.
On Nov 6, 2007 12:00 PM, Boris Kolpackov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sure. What I meant is we shouldn't make any hard dependencies between > code releases and porting to Forrest until all the infrastructure- > related work is done and the migration path is clear and worked out. > This way, if the person with the expertise is suddenly unable to > finish the work, we won't be stuck with something half-done and > unable to move forward with the code base. Hmm... OK. So you want the new forrest site to be 3.0 specific? > I propose we do it like this: do the initial port on the side and > then, when it is clear that the new setup can support all our use > cases go ahead with migrating the rest of documentation. While > this effort is underway, we can continue making new releases with > the old documentation system. If the initial effort fails for some > reason, then we have the old way of doing things to fall back on. > > I've been updating Xerces-C++ documentation not long ago and have > a good idea of the tricky parts. I can create a list of files that > would be good to port to Forrest as an initial port. all sounds reasonable to me. jas. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
