Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 09:30:27 -0700 From: "Bruce A. Mah" <bmah@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Nik Clayton <nik@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: Tom Hukins <tom@FreeBSD.ORG>, doc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Web site not linking to porters-handbook Message-ID: <200109071630.f87GUS483800@intruder.bmah.org> In-Reply-To: <20010907171519.M66592@clan.nothing-going-on.org> References: <20010907152605.A43978@eborcom.com> <20010907171519.M66592@clan.nothing-going-on.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--==_Exmh_-1836076330P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii If memory serves me right, Nik Clayton wrote: > On Fri, Sep 07, 2001 at 03:26:05PM +0100, Tom Hukins wrote: > > I've just tried building the Web site from source, and noticed that > > whilst symbolic links are created for handbook/ and FAQ/, they aren't > > for porters-handbook which is linked to from > > <http://www.FreeBSD.org/ports/index.html>. > > I think the link from ports/index.html should change. The FAQ and > Handbook are 'legacy', so we keep their old links around to prevent link > rot. But for anything newer we should use the full path when linking to > them. Agreed. Otherwise we'd be continually adding new symlinks to clutter up the top level of the Web site. Is there any preference on how new documents should refer to the FAQ and Handbook? (RELNOTESng uses full paths everywhere, or at least that was my intent.) Bruce. --==_Exmh_-1836076330P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD) Comment: Exmh version 2.3.1+ 05/14/2001 iD8DBQE7mPYj2MoxcVugUsMRArC6AJ9wWuqcZK7noiL429nLb6k+rk0vHwCfe7XU tFay98+o3Pa4bQvtHGEPOf4= =WOmU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_-1836076330P-- 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?200109071630.f87GUS483800>