Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 05 Dec 2008 09:58:43 +0900 (JST)
From:      Hiroki Sato <hrs@FreeBSD.org>
To:        pgj@FreeBSD.org, blackend@FreeBSD.org
Cc:        freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: [Sort of RFC] Ports and packages for docs
Message-ID:  <20081205.095843.138450898.hrs@allbsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <20081201103533.GC1330@gothic.blackend.org>
References:  <20081201080917.GA1330@gothic.blackend.org> <4933B2E8.10507@FreeBSD.org> <20081201103533.GC1330@gothic.blackend.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
----Security_Multipart(Fri_Dec__5_09_58_43_2008_346)--
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Marc Fonvieille <blackend@freebsd.org> wrote
  in <20081201103533.GC1330@gothic.blackend.org>:

bl> On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 10:48:24AM +0100, Gabor PALI wrote:
bl> > Marc Fonvieille wrote:
bl> > > I'm working since a while on ports for doc [..] and tell me if you
bl> > > like it :)
bl> >
bl> > I think generally it is a good idea to reanimate the concept
bl> > documentation packages, however last time I asked about them (May 2008,
bl> > while fixing the FAQ), I got an interesting answer [1] from Hiroki Sato:
bl> >
bl> > "The doc packages are no longer available because the past discussion
bl> > reached a consensus that generating them is a bit tricky and most of
bl> > people do not need such packages because the latest documentation is
bl> > always available on the web."
bl> >
bl> [...]
bl>
bl> But you cut the last sentence :)
bl>
bl> Yes, it was difficult to maintain them and we had no real solution to
bl> continue to provide them.  It's true that the doc is available via the
bl> web, but as I said the aim is not only provide packages to the user but
bl> also modernize the doc installation and build for the releases.
bl> Now, I have a working solution that can be updated, etc. without
bl> headaches, so we may have to rethink about the current situation.

 Ah, I certainly wrote the reply to Gabor in May.  It is true that the
 old packages are deprecated for the reason as I explained.  However,
 I do not think generating doc packages itself is a bad thing.

 The difficulty of the old packages is that they were not from the
 Ports Collection.  I mean they did not have any corresponding ports,
 so upgrading cannot be done in a straightforward way.  Using ports
 for the doc packages can eliminate the tricky part of the old ones
 and make the release distribution set simple.  I believe it is the
 right direction.

--
| Hiroki SATO

----Security_Multipart(Fri_Dec__5_09_58_43_2008_346)--
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (FreeBSD)

iEYEABECAAYFAkk4fMMACgkQTyzT2CeTzy0oSACfSKY4+J67rOezGJC0g6y4rNME
F3wAnRM0I9oR+9OyLvkQzVOfF9WfmrFm
=4iIl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

----Security_Multipart(Fri_Dec__5_09_58_43_2008_346)----



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20081205.095843.138450898.hrs>