On Wednesday, June 21, 2000, Marcus Meissner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 21, 2000 at 12:14:30PM -0700, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> > What do other people think? Any strong opinions for/against DocBook?
>
> I think we should include the HTML converted docbook in the CVS tree and
> snapshots. This reduces the number of tools to install ;)
>
> Every patch goes through Alexandre anyway, so he can rebuild the html.
I believe the only packages you need, e.g. on Debian, is task-sgml and
cygnus-stylesheets.
Of course, this sort of goes against the concept of not checking
generated files into CVS. There are other ways around it. These
problems have already been tackled by large projects who are already
using DocBook wholescale, like GNOME and KDE. We can offer separate
tarballs of the docs. Alternatively, GNOME uses makefile targets to
automatically generate and bundle the HTML docs into distributions
(meaning that only CVS developers need to generate them).
I don't know. It's a tricky question.
John
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gnome.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.worldforge.org
