Gervase Markham wrote:
>
> > > To have separate hierarchies for `docs' at all is meaningless. With the
> > > exception of binaries and stuff, everything on a Web site *is* documentation.
> >
> > I recognize that, which is why both software and projects are symlinked
> > under /docs. However, as many people will identify them as top-level, they
> > exist there, too. There's no reason why you can't have both, so to all
> > intents and purposes besides physical file storage, I put both.
>
> But what we are defining is _exactly_ physical file storage.
Didn't know that.
> As others have pointed out, you can map access directories on top using
> your web server if necessary. I think the guiding priciples have to be
> simplicity and obviousness for the person committing docs, not ease of
> navigability (although that comes with it, to an extent.)
> This is why I keep shouting about only have one set of docs directories,
> and one set of projects directories
No, you wanted different docs directories for users, web-developers, and
developers. More than one. I'm still not sure how this should be organized
in *either* plan, so I haven't put the last two in yet.
Still, it could have been streamlined more, and I agree with you there.
So, I have removed the superfluous one in /software, but I've retained
/tools under /docs/dev/tools. (It fits better there.)
> everything working the same for Mozilla itself and other projects/modules.
This is already the case.. It's the main reason why I posted a redesign in
the first place.
