Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 01:32:35 -0400 From: Tom Rhodes <trhodes@FreeBSD.org> To: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: .Xr references to ports in man pages Message-ID: <20030429013235.1743a16a.trhodes@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20030429173317.GA56779@sunbay.com> References: <20030424233703.GB48527@nitro.dk> <ien0ie9z21.0ie@localhost.localdomain> <20030425202427.GC28920@sunbay.com> <t2ist29m45.st2@localhost.localdomain> <20030426103416.GA407@nitro.dk> <20030426113227.GC9189@sunbay.com> <20030428232915.67cccaa8.trhodes@FreeBSD.org> <20030429173317.GA56779@sunbay.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 20:33:17 +0300 Ruslan Ermilov <ru@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 28, 2003 at 11:29:15PM -0400, Tom Rhodes wrote: > > > > So, are we going to work on this? > > > We already do. The only thing I miss is how people would like > it to be rendered, and I just need more opinions (more voices). > I hoped that ports@ and doc@ (not necessarily committers) > developers would suggest something, or agree on the proposed > one. With every hat I can fit on my head (wow, don't I look funny) I want to say we should do it in a similar fasion to how we do it in the doc project. Use things like: .Xr net/cvsup and render accordingly. Then we can parse the the MOVED file in the ports collection and boom. While it sounds much simpler than doing, I think it should be moved forward. :) > > > Perhaps this should be thrown at doceng? > > > Not needed; doceng is not for this sort of things and would like > such discussions to take place in doc@. Ok. I figured it was, or could be considered a doceng issue since it does have to deal with documentation. I'm more informed now, please carry on. :) > > > With my doceng@ hat on, Can I `borrow' that hat for about five minutes please? :) -- Tom Rhodes
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030429013235.1743a16a.trhodes>