Le 05/03/2015 19:32, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 5:14 AM, Jean-Pierre Chrétien
<[email protected]> wrote:
Hello,
Reviewing once more the Intro manual, I see in section 3.2.2 that it is
recommended that a user should retrieve the doc from master if he or she
intends to improve it.
Does that mean that every doc commit to branch is also committed to master ?
If not, retrieving the doc from branch would be better I think.
Hi Jean-Pierre,
I believe that every doc commit to master that is relevant to branch
(that is, it is not dependent on a new feature in master) is ported to
branch as well. I'm not sure of that though. Uwe does all the work.
Note that any changes to branch are lost when we move to a new major
version. For example if you made a long patch for 2.1.4, it would not
be included in 2.2.0 or 2.2.1, etc. If you commit to master, it will
be included in future versions, starting with the next major version.
Up to now, I have always edited the branch documentation until Uwe gives the
green light to go to master documentation with a changelog to be followed.
In the meantime, Uwe makes the big effort (thanks to him) to sync branch and
master docs before going to master doc update. Happily for him, there are few
languages where docs are thoroughly maintained.
For the po files, I do not sync branch and master regularly (I do make changes
which do not come from source edition, e.g. when I review or translate manuals),
I use the msgmerge command when time comes to do so, e.g. beta releases.
Is that the correct way to proceed, Uwe ?
Of course, a plain user who intends to improve the docs may not be aware of the
status of the doc update for translators. so let's leave the Intro manual as it
is, Uwe will manage the (I guess) few contributions which will be proposed.
--
Jean-Pierre
