From owner-freebsd-doc Fri Oct 18 14:30:13 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D691637B401; Fri, 18 Oct 2002 14:30:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from abigail.blackend.org (blackend.org [212.11.50.35]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ECED43E88; Fri, 18 Oct 2002 14:30:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from marc@blackend.org) Received: from abigail.blackend.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by abigail.blackend.org (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g9ILTPvN052615; Fri, 18 Oct 2002 23:29:25 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from marc@abigail.blackend.org) Received: (from marc@localhost) by abigail.blackend.org (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id g9ILTP3w052614; Fri, 18 Oct 2002 23:29:25 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from marc) Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 23:29:24 +0200 From: Marc Fonvieille To: Giorgos Keramidas Cc: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: Use of -CURRENT manual pages in our docs Message-ID: <20021018232924.G50649@abigail.blackend.org> References: <20021018212220.B50649@abigail.blackend.org> <20021018194751.GG16196@hades.hell.gr> <20021018223014.E50649@abigail.blackend.org> <20021018224804.F50649@abigail.blackend.org> <20021018211726.GA2822@hades.hell.gr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <20021018211726.GA2822@hades.hell.gr>; from keramida@freebsd.org on Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 12:17:26AM +0300 X-Useless-Header: blackend.org X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.6-PRERELEASE Sender: owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 12:17:26AM +0300, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > On 2002-10-18 22:48, Marc Fonvieille wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 18, 2002 at 10:47:51PM +0300, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > > > So what happens when today's current becomes tomorrow's stable? > > > I hope we won't have to rename all the &man.current.foo.X; entities to > > > &man.stable.foo.X; :-( > > > > However, indeed, we should avoid &man.current etc. for base system > > manpages. Tell me what you think about it, since it's easy to fix > > man-refs in that way... > > That's what I originally meant. We shouldn't overuse &man.current.*; > entities. I'm ok with that, if it's also added explicitly as a > comment to the file. Something similar to the following should be > more than enough: > > Whenever the need arises for a manpage reference that is only > meaningful for FreeBSD-current, the convention is to add an > entity to this file of the form &man.current.foo.1;. After a > while, when all required parts have been MFCed, you are > expected to change the documents to use &man.foo.1; and update > this file removing &man.current.foo.1;. > > I would even go as far as making the &man.current.*; entities a > separate file, at this point. But this is your call, and still just > an opinion. > I just reverted a part of the changes, the -CURRENT manual pages are "now" used in the same way I did for ports ones. Only the attribute 'current' is added in man-refs.ent, and nothing to change in sgml files. For the moment, it's the best solution in waiting for a convention on the manual page entities. And the convention should lead to a split of the man-refs.ent, but as I said in a previous mail, I prefer to wait and see... :) Marc To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message