+1
Regards,
-Rick
Jean T. Anderson wrote:
Jeff Levitt wrote:
<snip>
As the person who contributed the DITA-converted
documentation, I can tell you I didn't bump the
edition up based on that. I believe the pre-DITA
documentation already said Second Edition.
The pre-DITA (10.0) doc source says First Edition:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/db/derby/docs/branches/10.0/src/documentation/content/xdocs/manuals/getstart/gspr.ihtml
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/db/derby/docs/branches/10.0/src/documentation/content/xdocs/manuals/reference/sqlj.ihtml
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/db/derby/docs/branches/10.0/src/documentation/content/xdocs/manuals/develop/develop.ihtml
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/db/derby/docs/branches/10.0/src/documentation/content/xdocs/manuals/tools/tools.ihtml
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/db/derby/docs/branches/10.0/src/documentation/content/xdocs/manuals/admin/hubprnt.ihtml
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/db/derby/docs/branches/10.0/src/documentation/content/xdocs/manuals/tuning/perf.ihtml
The thought is that major releases (10.0, 10.1, 10.2)
are First Editions, and subsequent fixpaks are Second,
Third, Fourth editions etc., like 10.1.3 would be. In
any case, we haven't adhered to any kind of
consistency on this with the guides, so I agree that
we need to define what we feel is an "edition" and
stick with it or remove it alltogether (although
perhaps there's a legal reason to keep it?)
If we don't have a specific use for it, I recommend removing it. I don't
know of any legal reason to have it.
-jean
