Juan Manuel Palacios <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tuesday, February 13, 2007 at 9:25 AM -0800 wrote: >> modify installer README - >> http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/ticket/11010 > > Could you please handle this one..? You should be able to commit to >base, or send me a patch if you'd like me to handle that last bit.
Ok, I'll try it within a few days. >Varios documentation updates. Closes #4905, #6880 & #10840, while also >adding some other local changes Woot! I thank you from the bottom of my anal-retentive heart that you've closed these lingering doc tickets! > > >> -And these I'll look at more closely soon and see if it is man pages >> thatneed updating or just web documentation, perhaps the latter. I've >not >> looked closely at them yet. Any opinions are welcome. >> http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/ticket/8822 > > Totally website documentation... but unfortunately that's mostly a >blackhole at the moment for several reasons: > Yeah I agreee. > >> http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/ticket/10877 >> > > As for this one: if a given port does not offer whatever functionality >is required by the user, the standard procedure should be to open a >trac ticket requesting an enhancement with the appropriate variant, >assigned to the port maintainer; reinstalling the port with the variant >once it's checking in should satisfy the demand. That should definitely >be documented somewhere, guide, wiki, both, but it doesn't seem like >man page thing to me. Makes sense. > >> -This is the only one that I might have to defer this to after 1.4, >> though >> I may be able to get it. I want to try writing it in DocBook and >> transforming to a manpage. If I should do that can the source xml be >> stored also for future revisions? Or would that be a problem? > >> http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/ticket/5275 > > As I said in my comment to this, I don't see much added value to a >portindex(1) man page, users shouldn't see themselves in the need of >indexing manually. And those who do should probably be savvy enough to >figure stuff out on their own. I can't even find the draft I had for >that page ;-) I'll see about closing that ticket. > Here I was only referring to creating a man apge from scratch for #5275. Since you don't think it is necessary, then I'm just going to forget about that. > Not at all! In fact, quite on the contrary, we can make room in svn >for just about anything we might need for future reference, certainly >including documentation. Before you start please do take a look at the >trunk/doc svn dir, the old guide xml files are there, they should serve >you to get started. Kudos to you if you plan to revive the guide >effort! I'm thinking a wiki oriented approach is preferable, though, so >maybe you could take what's there and use the contents to start >creating trac Wiki entries...? Just a thought... I agree that the Wiki is preferred for the docs. As I said, I was thinking of a new man page. I'd like to contribute to the reference docs, but I need to come up with a structural concept for the docs in mind before I could do that and I can't make promises here. Then I and the rest of us could throw stuff in the Wiki as we see fit. But I don't know if or when I'll come up with an organizing concept so I can't make promises here. > > So... If you can please draw up a work schedule and let me know what >you're planning on...? I don't think there are those many things left >to include for the 1.4 release. I'll wait to see what others think of my new ideas for portfile.7. Sorry, the possible additions I have in mind for portfile.7 did not occur to me until just now or I'd have done them before! Mark _______________________________________________ macports-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
