On Tue, 16 Feb 1999 12:36:28 +0100, Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On Mon, Feb 15, 1999 at 05:45:56PM -0500, Adam Di Carlo wrote: >> You should take a closer look at DDP's manuals.sgml Makefile >> system. It was designed for people to be able to tweak a single >> variable, which can be set on the command line, and install all the >> files into subdirectories on any given prefix.
> That is how generally Makefiles operate, isn't it? Like, `make > CFLAGS=-O12` and all the lower level makefiles will do the same. Yes. >> There certainly *are* translations of most of the documents in the >> DDP area, at least, the mature documents. They are simply >> uncollected at this point, which is a big problem. > No, it is not a problem. It is nothing :'< I didn't even knew that > there are :( Well, I think whoever puts together the DDP/www.debian.org pages should collect the translations and put them in the right place. Optimally, we could keep the SGML in the DDP cvs area; eventually we should be looking to break out language-independant parts of the SGML, i.e., in entities, like I do with the boot-floppies installation document. Thats my HO, of course. >> I agree with JT that we should only put *officially* released info >> under www.debian.org/doc/ > How would you define officially? Just the documents that were > released with hamm (at the moment, soon that'll be slink), and these > versions? If so, that removes any need to use DDP's current > resources. I think I disagree. For one, the only facility for this is the 'byhand' entries in the changes file. I don't think it's really appropriate or a good idea to populate all the DDP/www.debian.org pages this way. Another reason this isn't such a good idea is that the people who handle Incoming is ftp-admin, now wwwmasters. I propose we just do 'make PREFIX=/org/www.debian.org/doc/manuals developers-reference' when, say, the developers-reference package is released, i.e., just do it manually at the proper time. I wish I could think of a even better way... > JT just needs to unpack the appropriate .debs in right > places and that is it. Presuming, that we have .debs for the > official documents, do we? Well, in some cases we do; in cases where we don't, and we should. Packaging up documentation .debs is easy -- I'd be glad to help here where we can. > Then I propose that $(www.debian.org)/doc/maint-guide gets removed > from that location, since it wouldn't belong there. Well, I guess that depends on whether we really feel that *only* packaged docs be in the DDP/www.debian.org pages. >> The point is not to create more work. Think about the folks who >> have to maintain this stuff for years.... > Explain this - what maintaining, work for webmasters or for authors > of the documents? I'm thinking of ftpmaster and webmasters. And DDP masters. > All of it would work instantly? Then why didn't anyone come to this > before? Well, we planned it to work. The reason it hasn't been done is simply that Oliver hasn't done it and no one else has stepped up. Wanna step up? >> Leave cvs:ddp/webpages as is and do *not* try to shim them into the >> website. > Most of its contents will be incorporated in /doc/index.wml, anyhow, > or do we wish just to do this, and not point anyone to the new > locations? :) Well, I think we still want the DDP developer pages with the nightly autobuild and source access, but also the "official" DDP/www.debian.org pages for "released" (whatever that means) documentation. BTW, do you know WML pretty well? Maybe you could help me out a bit on an unrelated issue? -- .....Adam Di [EMAIL PROTECTED]<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>
