On Mon, May 06, 2002 at 11:17:12AM -0400, Dan York wrote:
Last time we (the DocBook Open Repository team) discussed it, the
general feeling was that Make was still more broadly available than
ant and was thus more appropriate.
100% agreed... warts and all, make is still the only thing
At 11:17 06/05/2002 -0400, Dan York wrote:
Last time we (the DocBook Open Repository team) discussed it, the
general feeling was that Make was still more broadly available than
ant and was thus more appropriate.
100% agreed... warts and all, make is still the only thing you can count
on
At 18:32 06/05/2002 +0200, Holger Krug wrote:
Today it is very difficult to *make docbook*, it takes several hours
to find all the resources needed,
Good point Holger.
Unless you've done it before, the full list of 'bits I need'
are quite tiresome to track down.
Worth a webpage on both oasis,
Dave Pawson wrote:
At 11:17 06/05/2002 -0400, Dan York wrote:
Last time we (the DocBook Open Repository team) discussed it, the
general feeling was that Make was still more broadly available than
ant and was thus more appropriate.
100% agreed... warts and all, make is still the
At 20:56 06/05/2002 +0200, Jirka Kosek wrote:
I'm able to make stylesheets in Win32 environment using Cygwin. Having
better and more automatically working making environment (based on make
or ant) will be plus, but there are more important things I think.
Agreed.
Normall people are not forced
On Mon, May 06, 2002 at 07:53:19PM +0100, Dave Pawson wrote:
At 18:32 06/05/2002 +0200, Holger Krug wrote:
Today it is very difficult to *make docbook*, it takes several hours
to find all the resources needed,
Worth a webpage on both oasis, docbook.org and sourceforge
perhaps, just
