"Bruce A. Mah" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If memory serves me right, Makoto MATSUSHITA wrote:
> > takhus> Perhaps the *.TXT files could be periodically regenerated to their 
> > takhus> current location to 1) avoid a POLA violation and 2) allow for at
> > takhus> least some RELNOTES without needing DocBook and doc/ (even if they
> > takhus> may be slightly out of date).
> [snip]
> Umm, no, it's not just like the current doc distribution.  If you build
> a release with NODOC=YES, you don't get any rendition of the FAQ,
> Handbook, etc.  There's no *.TXT files to fall back on.
> Here's my thoughts...for the record, I'm weakly opposed to regen-ing
> *.TXT versions:  First, I don't want to bloat the repository with oodles
> of builds to the *.TXT files.  If we do this, it ought to be be fairly
> infrequently, like maybe once or twice a month.
> [ snip other good reasons not to regen and commit TXT files ]

I agree completely.  On a slightly related note, do you object, or
have plans to, build the release notes with the web site?  It would
solve this problem very nicely.  I understand that relnotes will be in
src/, so this would have to be an optional part of the build, but at
least having them built on www.freebsd.org would suffice.

                                        Dima Dorfman
                                        [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to