+1, That is a very good point !! But may we can still write it as plain text, put some tags in, and use "sed" to split when generating installation sets ?
janI On 22 October 2012 18:00, Keith N. McKenna <keith.mcke...@comcast.net>wrote: > jan iversen wrote: > >> As far as I can see on the usage are your assumption correct, and there >> must be other ways to make different readme text platform dependent. >> >> Would it not be ok, to have one readme for all platforms, and in the text >> mention the specics ? >> >> janI >> >> On 22 October 2012 13:34, Jürgen Schmidt <jogischm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On 10/21/12 2:16 PM, jan iversen wrote: >>> >>>> There is exactly one file with extension .xrm >>>> >>>> main/read_license_oo/docs/**readme/readme.xrm >>>> >>>> is there a reason (apart from history) for it being in .xrm or could it >>>> >>> be >>> >>>> converted to e.g. .xhp ? >>>> >>>> If so we could get rid of one more conversion tool (read: does not need >>>> >>> to >>> >>>> be converted to new code). >>>> >>>> >>> I am not sure if xhp would be a good option here. But we can probably >>> switch to something else. Maybe a common readme file that gets extended >>> with platform specific portions from other files. When I remember it >>> correctly the xrm files contains the content for the readme file and >>> depending on the platform different content is extracted from this file. >>> >>> Juergen >>> >>> >>> >> Jan; > > That may indeed be one way to do it. My concern is that users will get > frustrated trying to wade through the info for the other platforms and just > not bother with it at all. Of course based on the way they read the release > notes they probably don't read it anyway. Be that as it may do we want to > give them another reason not to read it and possible miss pertinent > information. > > Regards > Keith > >
