On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 09:03:10AM -0700, Bruce A. Mah wrote:
There's a snapshot of RELNOTESng for -CURRENT, updated irregularly,
at:
http://people.freebsd.org/~bmah/relnotes/
Like it.
My main concern is that this is in the src/ tree. As other people
have said this is going to complicate
If memory serves me right, Wilko Bulte wrote:
On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 05:06:12PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Antoine Beaupre (LMC) writ
es:
: Hey whatever. Let's just keep a rendered TXT version where it always
: (ie. in the src/release... cvs) was but keep the
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 09:58:43AM -0700, Bruce A. Mah wrote:
This problem (which I agree is valid) is not so much a problem as to
where the release notes live, but the fact that one needs to actually
build human-readable renderings of them. If people can't be bothered
to install the
If memory serves me right, Nik Clayton wrote:
Like it.
OK, thanks, that's a good start...
My main concern is that this is in the src/ tree. As other people
have said this is going to complicate things for src/ folks who just
want up to date release notes,
This problem (which I agree is
On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 05:06:12PM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Antoine Beaupre (LMC) writes:
: Hey whatever. Let's just keep a rendered TXT version where it always
: (ie. in the src/release... cvs) was but keep the originial as a sgml
: version in the doc tree.
On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Bruce A. Mah wrote:
[...]
There are two disadvantages to going this route. I think they're
fairly minor:
1. Generating a set of release notes requires the DocBook toolchain
to be built, as well as the doc/ subtree. Note that RELNOTESng
will have
takhus Perhaps the *.TXT files could be periodically regenerated to their
takhus current location to 1) avoid a POLA violation and 2) allow for at
takhus least some RELNOTES without needing DocBook and doc/ (even if they
takhus may be slightly out of date).
I second this.
It is true that
[Please keep me as one of the explicit recipients of this email.
Thanks.]
If memory serves me right, Makoto MATSUSHITA wrote:
takhus Perhaps the *.TXT files could be periodically regenerated to their
takhus current location to 1) avoid a POLA violation and 2) allow for at
takhus least
On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 09:58:40AM -0700, Bruce A. Mah wrote:
[Please keep me as one of the explicit recipients of this email.
Removing *.TXT files also makes some difficulties when ordinally make
buildworld/installworld users want to know what changes are made
(they should change their
Here's my thoughts...for the record, I'm weakly opposed to regen-ing
*.TXT versions: First, I don't want to bloat the repository with oodles
of builds to the *.TXT files. If we do this, it ought to be be fairly
infrequently, like maybe once or twice a month.
Bad idea..
Hey whatever. Let's just keep a rendered TXT version where it always
(ie. in the src/release... cvs) was but keep the originial as a sgml
version in the doc tree.
Just like ports/INDEX. Only better.
I think it is important to solve the duplication problem we have. It
would be very sad to see a
On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 09:42:07PM +0200, Leif Neland wrote:
Here's my thoughts...for the record, I'm weakly opposed to regen-ing
*.TXT versions: First, I don't want to bloat the repository with oodles
of builds to the *.TXT files. If we do this, it ought to be be fairly
If memory serves me right, Wilko Bulte wrote:
On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 09:42:07PM +0200, Leif Neland wrote:
As UPDATING may contain information nessecary to run make world, it can't b
e built by make world.
Chicken and egg, methinks...
Possibly. But I was not refering to UPDATING.
Just
On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 09:42:07PM +0200, Leif Neland wrote:
Here's my thoughts...for the record, I'm weakly opposed to regen-ing
*.TXT versions: First, I don't want to bloat the repository with oodles
of builds to the *.TXT files. If we do this, it ought to be be fairly
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Antoine Beaupre (LMC) writes:
: Hey whatever. Let's just keep a rendered TXT version where it always
: (ie. in the src/release... cvs) was but keep the originial as a sgml
: version in the doc tree.
UPDATING will continue to be a flat file, or I will no longer
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Warner Losh writes:
: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] Antoine Beaupre (LMC) writes:
: : Hey whatever. Let's just keep a rendered TXT version where it always
: : (ie. in the src/release... cvs) was but keep the originial as a sgml
: : version in the doc tree.
:
:
If memory serves me right, Dima Dorfman wrote:
On a slightly related note, do you object, or
have plans to, build the release notes with the web site? It would
solve this problem very nicely.
Hi Dima--
No objections, but no plans right now either. Mostly because I don't
know enough about
Bruce A. Mah [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If memory serves me right, Makoto MATSUSHITA wrote:
takhus Perhaps the *.TXT files could be periodically regenerated to their
takhus current location to 1) avoid a POLA violation and 2) allow for at
takhus least some RELNOTES without needing
Sorry for late reply.
bmah My first reaction is, is doing doc.1 *that* much of a problem? When
bmah I was testing, it didn't seem like building this consumed much time or
bmah disk space compared to the rest of the make release process (i.e.
bmah building world and several kernels). A
* Bruce A. Mah [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010424 09:04] wrote:
(Apologies to -doc people who have probably heard this ad nauseum.)
Over the past few months, I've been working on a project that I've
taken to calling RELNOTESng, which is the overhaul of RELNOTES.TXT and
related files that we package
On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 09:25:34AM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
Sounds like some excellent work that was long over due. Go for it. :)
Agreed.
I've always found there are doc hackers willing to help with markup
problems on request, so I don't think that's a serious issue.
Kris
PGP
21 matches
Mail list logo
