On 28-03-2012 16:57, Rich Bowen wrote:
On Mar 28, 2012, at 10:53 AM, André Malo wrote:
On Wednesday 28 March 2012 15:33:01 Rich Bowen wrote:
I'd like to propose that we retire (ie, svn delete) translations in 2.4
that are more than, say, 2 years out of date, as they assuredly don't
reflect the current state of things, and do a disservice to our
customers.
Leaving them in trunk seems harmless, but having them in a released
product
is misleading.
I haven't yet done the actual poking around to determine which
translations
that would be, but I'd suspect .ja, .ko, .es and .de?
Or we could be more selective, and get rid of translations of things
(authnz, logging, proxy) that we know for certain has radically
changed in
the last few years, while leaving things like the index files that may
still be worthwhile.
My (unbacked) guess is, that the out-of-dateness is mostly missing
directives
and otherwise tweaks here and there. I'd rather adjust the xslt to
include a
(translated) reference to the english directive docs as a
placeholder. That
way we don't lose the rest (which may or maybe not accurate).
As always, your much greater skill with xslt would be greatly
appreciated here, if you'd be willing to make that adjustment. That
sounds like a good idea. It does make it harder to know, however,
which changes were *fixes* and which changes were *updates*, when it
comes to saying that a particular doc is or is not out of date.
--
Rich Bowen
rbo...@rcbowen.com <mailto:rbo...@rcbowen.com> :: @rbowen
rbo...@apache.org <mailto:rbo...@apache.org>
That's exactly what I'm worried about - that the links etc might be
fixed (blame me for that), but the context isn't up to date. An example
could be a description of what is default behavior, and that behavior
could have changed, so simply changing fx a link to Require would pretty
much ruin the documentation if the context referred to the 2.2 version
of Require but linked to the 2.4 methods.
I think a better way would be to advise people that these documents are
going to be retired, and give them a period of, let say a month, to get
them up to date, otherwise they will be retired. Surely, if all the doc
needs is a tweak here and there, it's possible to manage this without
having to resort to complex XSLT transformations that may or may not
mess up the context instead of fixing something.
With regards,
Daniel.
