On Thu, 11 Mar 1999, Andreas Schott wrote:
> when I go to http://saftsack.fs.uni-bayreuth.de/~latex2ht/,
> there is an empty file stating `LATEST IS v98.2beta8',
> but l2h-latest.tar.gz is of same date and size as
> l2h98_2beta6.tar.gz. This is inconsistent. Futhermore
> IMHO betas should never be call latest, which means go
> into the public without telling it is beta. So latest would
> probably be l2h98_1p7.tar.gz? (And why is this not found
> on www-dsed.llnl.gov? Many people still go there.)
Agree. As far as I understand, the "saftsack" site is a pure developer
site with all the latest hacks and modifications. "www-dsed" is the
release site for the broad public.
There are some automatic procedures to update the contents of the
"saftsack" site, maybe there is something wrong with that...
I'm not sure about the releasing mechanism, Ross could yo elaborate on
this?
IMHO we should follow a similiar approach like the Linux kernel:
A stable major release is named
latex2html-99.1.tar.gz (with the appropriate "LATEST_IS" link)
Patches/fixes relative to this version are named
latex2html-99.1p1.tar.gz
These versions appear on "www-dsed" (but who puts
them there?). Pre-release/alpha/beta versions appear on "saftsack" only
and are named
latex2html-99.2alpha1.tar.gz
and the like.
> Is saftsack now the official primary site or only for developers?
Development. As Jens Lippmann left Darmstadt University we decided to
move the development repository (CVS) from Darmstadt to Bayreuth (thanks
to my fellow students for providing the infrastructure).
> If it is official, the pages on www-dsed.llnl.gov should state
> that. (This is also induced by Robin's answer to Ross's mail.)
Ok, true. Maybe we should think about making "saftsack" the one and only
LaTeX2HTML site. I do *not* want to criticize Scott Nelson's work
(excellent job!!), this idea is only for simplicity. Discussion on :-)
> So what is actually the latest official release? I strongly
> recommend releasing at least two offical versions per year.
Agree. Let's make more frequent public releases. IMHO after 3-5 patch
releases (...p1, ...p2 etc.) there should be a new "full" release. Jens,
Ross, do you agree?
> But this also means, since we now have 1999, if you release
> v98.2 beta8 you should name it v99.1.
This version is on its way... Go, Ross, go!!! ;-)
> So you people are doing a great work developing, but the
> marketing is not as good as it should be.
Agree, too. What LaTeX2HTML lacks is a comprehensive web site. Jens, this
might be a job for you?!? "saftsack" has a recent Web-Server and space
for this, and "www-dsed" as well, I suppose...
> Even people
> listening this least (as me) are not sure about the current
> state of the releases. IMHO two real releases per year at
> least show that there is really development on the way.
> Even if the changes are small, e.g. bugfixes, one should
> raise the release-numbers, so probably 98.1p7 should have
> been named 98.2?
Thanks for your comments, we appreciate them. More info will follow soon
on this list...
-Marek
***********************************************************
* Marek Rouchal [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
* http://saftsack.fs.uni-bayreuth.de/~marek *
* Linux, Perl, Latex2HTML enthusiast. PGP key available. *
***********************************************************
