Cornelia Huck <[email protected]> writes:
> On Fri, 27 Mar 2020 10:37:55 +0000 > Alex Bennée <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I was reviewing someones virtio-spec and realised that I wasn't quite >> sure what it had been built from. Seeing as the standard is hosted in >> git I've tried to clean up some of the automation to make it clearer >> what a particular rendering was built from. Going forward it would be >> nice to use signed annotated tags for the final build version but I >> don't know how much of the boilerplate is down to OASIS requirements. > > OASIS requirements are my concern here as well. I've tried to do some digging although the Oasis website has a lot of policy documents. I think the most relevant one is: https://docs.oasis-open.org/specGuidelines/ndr/namingDirectives.html which as far as I can make out is mostly concerned that the final work product meets the naming standard by version and stage. Although ZIP files are mentioned a couple of times it is in the context of a file containing work products for local use. My personal interpretation is that if the final work products are correctly named and have the version information in them the rest is just ephemera. However I could be wrong so defer to anyone more familiar with the policies. An random sampling of ZIP files on https://www.oasis-open.org/standards has shown them all to just contain the individual work products without any extraneous REVISION/REVISION-DATE files. Anyway I defer to those with more experience of the process and I'll leave the question of tex vs rst for another day ;-) -- Alex Bennée --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
