On Fri, Jul 1, 2022 at 8:01 AM Rony G. Flatscher <rony.flatsc...@wu.ac.at> wrote:
> Hi P.O., > On 01.07.2022 11:53, P.O. Jonsson wrote: > > > Am 28.06.2022 um 11:19 schrieb Rony G. Flatscher <rony.flatsc...@wu.ac.at > >: > > Here the direct link: > <https://sourceforge.net/projects/oorexx/files/oorexx-docs/5.0.0test/> > <https://sourceforge.net/projects/oorexx/files/oorexx-docs/5.0.0test/> > > > > After initial tests I have moved to > > https://sourceforge.net/projects/oorexx/files/oorexx-docs/5.0.0beta/ > > +1 > > > And > > https://sourceforge.net/projects/oorexx/files/oorexx-docs/5.0.0html/ > > +1 > > The next time anyone work on a book it will be reflected here, > > I intend to create a „docbuildtools“ directory here as well and add the > documents from the /docs/trunk/tools brach of the source code tree. Any > objections? > > +1 > > On the same subject: in the „Files“ part of the source forge site there is > the subdir windows-build-tools > <https://sourceforge.net/projects/oorexx/files/windows-build-tools/> which > does NOT contain build tools but actually the obsolete „Publican“ > documentation build tools. Can I move this content to an „obsolete“ section > of the source tree? I hesitate to delete it. Feedback requested. > > As it is not relevant anymore, why not delete it. SourceForge as a version > control system would keep it around such that one could "undelete" (revert) > it later should interest or need arise. > Except this the files section, which is not under version control. If it's deleted, it's gone. I think we need to keep a copy around, but in place where it's obvious it's not the most current. Rick > ---rony > > _______________________________________________ > Oorexx-devel mailing list > Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel >
_______________________________________________ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
