Currently, Postfix documentation is maintained as part of the source
code (the "why" for that is discussed at the end).
>From this source code are generated multiple formats:
- Flat ASCII(UTF8) manpages and READMEs. Flat-text manpages must
always be installed locally when Postfix is installed or updated
on a system. The purpose of the flat-text READMEs is less clear,
but generating them is cheap.
- Hyperlinked HTML (manpages and READMEs). The hyperlinked HTML is
always published to the website with each new release, up to several
times in a month depending on activity. These files may be installed
locally when Postfix is installed or updated on a system.
Because documentation and source evolve hand-in-hand, I would not
want to separate their life cycles. Work on documentation often
evolves during implementation (if I cannot explain something in
documentation, then it is probably not worth implementing; and if
I implement something without documenting it, then no-ine will be
able to use it correctly).
One special case:
While the text about Postfix itself is maintained continuously as
Postfix code evolves, that has not happened with the text that
covers how Postfix integrates with other software.
I was therefore asking for input to "catch up" that text with
reality, and I would still appreciate input for that. Especially
if that can be done without divorcing the integrated evolution of
code and documentation.
So, one approach might be to submit diffs against the un-hyperlinked
source code.
Wietse
_______________________________________________
Postfix-users mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
