Date: Sat, 28 Aug 1999 22:37:40 +1200 From: "Dan Langille" <junkmale@xtra.co.nz> To: Nik Clayton <nik@freebsd.org> Cc: doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Supporting non-DocBook documents in the tree Message-ID: <19990828104217.PUYK3442178.mta1-rme@wocker> In-Reply-To: <19990827132242.A26830@kilt.nothing-going-on.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On 27 Aug 99, at 13:22, Nik Clayton wrote:
> Specifically, I'm thinking of the sort of author who's just made a bit of a
> breakthrough on something ("How I got my mumblefrozz card working under
> FreeBSD") and wants to contribute that to the project. They've written it
> up in either plain text, or HTML, and that's what they send us. Their
> point of view is that they're doing us a favour, and that they shouldn't
> have to spend more of their time learning DocBook before we'll take their
> article. I think this is a wholly understandable point of view.
I think it's a good idea to accept non DocBook stuff.
> I get the impression that we're currently viewed as being a bit
> inflexible about the formats that we accept documentation in, and that even
> when we do accept submissions, it takes us a while to get around to
> converting them to DocBook. This is mostly due to lack of manpower.
What is the main reason for using DocBook as opposed to some other format?
--
Dan Langille - DVL Software Limited
The FreeBSD Diary - http://www.FreeBSDDiary.org/freebsd/
NZ FreeBSD User Group - http://www.nzfug.nz.freebsd.org/
The Racing System - http://www.racingsystem.com/racingsystem.htm
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-doc" in the body of the message
help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990828104217.PUYK3442178.mta1-rme>