Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 02:10:29 +0900 (JST) From: Hiroki Sato <hrs@FreeBSD.org> To: simon@FreeBSD.org Cc: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD doc packages - docs/71153 Message-ID: <20050819.021029.95818809.hrs@allbsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20050612170112.GT821@zaphod.nitro.dk> References: <20050612170112.GT821@zaphod.nitro.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
----Security_Multipart(Fri_Aug_19_02_10_29_2005_854)-- Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Simon, "Simon L. Nielsen" <simon@freebsd.org> wrote in <20050612170112.GT821@zaphod.nitro.dk>: si> The doc packages have now been more or less broken for about a year si> (yes I should have gotten around to looking at it, but...) and I have si> yet to hear anyone mention this (other than ceri in the docs/71153). si> si> So, is there really a point in keeping doc packages around? I don't si> really think they are that interesting and they in account for a large si> part of doc/ on the FTP mirrors. I guess few people know about the doc packages and/or most of people read the docs online only... Well, what do you think about removing the current doc packages and providing ports which simply fetch and install tarballs built in doc/$LANGCODE during a full build? In the ports collection, periodical build check is performed on pointyhat and they have better visibility for people, I think. -- | Hiroki SATO ----Security_Multipart(Fri_Aug_19_02_10_29_2005_854)-- Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBDBMEFTyzT2CeTzy0RAgTtAKDA5uyL7lwmdKDqiITl5DID0j7LswCdFsSR 4tZOS1zfaMlwdhmQqGwv5SM= =ZWad -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ----Security_Multipart(Fri_Aug_19_02_10_29_2005_854)----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050819.021029.95818809.hrs>