On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 00:05, Christian Weiske <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello all, > > > Now that peardoc also uses PhD, we need a good method to track > revisions for the english version and translations. > We need a way to determine if translations are outdated, and if those > outdatedness is only minor or a major outdatance. > There has been a discussion about this [1], but that was over a year > ago and nothing has been done yet. > I personally favor the docbook revision attribute for the file's top > level tag, with a major and minor rev number. Incrementing the major one > determines that big/major changes have been done, while a minor number > enhancement tells you that only smaller things have changed. The > numbers would be updated manually instead of automatically - which has > the advantage that typos can be fixed without bumping the number. > > When a translation differs in the major number, a big fat warning > should be displayed at top of the page. > > In comparison to the currently used Revcheck comment in the files, the > revision attributes can be read programmatically using plain XML > libraries, without own parsing scripts. > > > So what do people think now, one year after the last discussion?
I still think manual bumping is the way-to-go, but I can live with automaticbumping if someone writes such a svn hook. -Hannes
