Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 10 Jul 2001 16:02:40 +0100
From:      Nik Clayton <nik@freebsd.org>
To:        Dima Dorfman <dima@unixfreak.org>
Cc:        Nik Clayton <nik@freebsd.org>, doc@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: State of the Handbook
Message-ID:  <20010710160240.K16152@clan.nothing-going-on.org>
In-Reply-To: <20010710135450.EA8803E2F@bazooka.unixfreak.org>; from dima@unixfreak.org on Tue, Jul 10, 2001 at 06:54:50AM -0700
References:  <20010710135753.G16152@clan.nothing-going-on.org> <20010710135450.EA8803E2F@bazooka.unixfreak.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--hl1kWnBARzJiTscN
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Jul 10, 2001 at 06:54:50AM -0700, Dima Dorfman wrote:
> Nik Clayton <nik@freebsd.org> writes:
> > On Tue, Jul 10, 2001 at 04:32:47AM -0700, Dima Dorfman wrote:
> > > Do we have a mechanism so that we can keep the ASCII art and display
> > > it where necessary?  I.e., I'd rather not see the ASCII art thrown
> > > away; not everybody wants to start a graphics-capable browser to read
> > > the docs (I know I don't).
> >=20
> > Yes we do.  See section 4.2.6 of the primer.

<snip>

> Okay, so it's possible but not exactly trivial.  Well, that's good
> enough.  At this point, it'd just be nice if whoever replaces the
> ASCII art with something else leave the ASCII art intact, perhaps in a
> comment.

The ASCII art will always be retained, otherwise the plain text output
format would stop working.  In that respect, there's no change.

> > > I don't see a problem with individual copyright holders as long as
> > > they're using a reasonable license. =3D20
> >=20
> > We still have to define 'reasonable' in this context.  There are a half
> > dozen or so 'documentation' licenses out there; the GNU Free
> > Documentation License, the Open Content License, and whatever licenses
> > people like Apple are using for Darwin.  Then there's the BSD-style
> > license I (fairly abitrarily) slapped on the Handbook.
>=20
> Berkeley stuck their BSDL on the man pages that shipped with 4.4BSD.
> I mean they stuck it on them verbatim; it still mentions distribution
> in source and binary form :-).  At least you modified the one you
> stuck on the Handbook to actually refer to documentation rather than
> source code.
>=20
> Well, I guess we need to come up with one de-facto license and ask
> that new documentation use it, and try to convince the other copyright
> holders to adopt it.
>=20
> > I'm also uncertain how things like the copyright notice on chapter 13,
> > or appendix F, 4,3,
>=20
> Which chapter 13 ;-)?  On my local build, 13 is l10n; on
> www.freebsd.org (which is messed up right now), it's x11.  Neither has
> anything that resembles a license at the top.

The x11 chapter, which has a note that the chapter remains copyright
Greg -- I've got no idea what license Greg gave when he donated this
chapter to the doc. project.  It may have included a "Do not distribute
for profit" clause.

We need to go through the documentation and clear these up.

> > > And while WRS is sponsering this stuff, perhaps they can get another
> > > computer to act as www.freebsd.org; having freefall do that isn't good
> > > for security.  Oh, and maybe they can help fix the "broken Handbook"
> > > problem that comes up every so often on the lists; it's quite real,
> > > and is happening more and more often now :-/.
> >=20
> > Working on it (I've just pinged admins@freebsd.org about this).
>=20
> I hope you mean about the first part, not the part about the corrupted
> Handbook.  I think the latter is caused either by a malfunction in
> Jade, or, more likely, a malfunction in the way Jade is run.  I recall
> logging into freefall and seeing two instances of jade running; this
> either means that the build took more than 12 hours, that the build
> scripts used the -j option to make(1), or some other weirdness.  Since
> this happens quite often on freefall but never for anybody else (that
> I know of), it's likely that it has something to do with the build
> environment.

It's something to do with freefall, as I've *never* seen this corruption
when I build the docs locally.

N
--=20
FreeBSD: The Power to Serve             http://www.freebsd.org/
FreeBSD Documentation Project           http://www.freebsd.org/docproj/

          --- 15B8 3FFC DDB4 34B0 AA5F  94B7 93A8 0764 2C37 E375 ---

--hl1kWnBARzJiTscN
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iEYEARECAAYFAjtLGQ8ACgkQk6gHZCw343VR3gCbBcNpzz7EZXZPU1/bDGBh7DMh
XFYAn0JE6ibXes5Lh9YMbYoXs72M7gS8
=6VHu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--hl1kWnBARzJiTscN--

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010710160240.K16152>