From owner-cvs-all Tue Sep 15 08:03:27 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from daemon@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA24694 for cvs-all-outgoing; Tue, 15 Sep 1998 08:03:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-cvs-all) Received: from fallout.campusview.indiana.edu (fallout.campusview.indiana.edu [149.159.1.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id IAA24679 for ; Tue, 15 Sep 1998 08:03:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jfieber@indiana.edu) Received: from localhost (jfieber@localhost) by fallout.campusview.indiana.edu (8.8.8/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA07512; Tue, 15 Sep 1998 10:02:28 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 10:02:27 -0500 (EST) From: John Fieber To: Jun Kuriyama cc: committers Subject: Re: Can we branch doc/ja/man? In-Reply-To: <35FE38FE.E09093DD@sky.rim.or.jp> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Tue, 15 Sep 1998, Jun Kuriyama wrote: > We are working in doc/ja/man for RELENG_2_2 branch now. But manpage > diffs between RELENG_2_2 and HEAD is pretty big, so we started to > prepare translation for 3.0-RELEASE. Historically, the main reason for separating out the doc tree from the main freebsd src tree was to provide a "branch free zone" for things like the Handbook and FAQ where maintaining separate branches is non-sensical. In previous conversations about where to put the Japanese translations, I raised this as an issue and was given the argument[1] that this branch free zone was exactly what the Japanese man pages needed. Have things changed? It is fine if they have but could some CVS expert shed light on the practicality/hassles of having part of the doc tree branched with the other part not? -john [1] I probably have most of the email transactions on the subject, but not ready at hand.