Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 16:02:51 -0500 From: Tom Rhodes <trhodes@FreeBSD.org> To: "Simon L. Nielsen" <simon@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Nik Clayton <nik@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Doc BoF at EuroBSDCon Message-ID: <20041202160251.269d9078@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20041202203441.GM753@zaphod.nitro.dk> References: <20041128202656.GL750@zaphod.nitro.dk> <20041129060320.GA26868@clan.nothing-going-on.org> <20041202203441.GM753@zaphod.nitro.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 21:34:42 +0100 "Simon L. Nielsen" <simon@freebsd.org> wrote: > On 2004.11.29 06:03:20 +0000, Nik Clayton wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 28, 2004 at 09:26:57PM +0100, Simon L. Nielsen wrote: > > > - Changing doc from SGML to XML (yes, really do it this time) > [SNIP] > > > - To be as little disruptive as possible to normal doc work it was > > > suggested to branch the doc/ tree for the work, and do the work in a > > > separate branch, to be merged into the main branch later again. > > > > Rather than branch it in CVS I'd say use Perforce for this work. > > We actually also talked about that, and personally I do agree perforce > would be a good tool for work like this. I even think Tom Rhodes has > given in and tried it now... :-) Yes, I've finally started using perforce ... It's all the fault of John, Robert and Wayne (Audit3 stuff). So we can do that. > > > > - Handling multiple FreeBSD release branches (4.X/5.X/6.X) in Handbook > > > to get rid of notes about "For 4.X do....". There should be > > > multiple build Handbook versions on website, and perhaps one > > > complete one with "This section is for 4.X only..." and so on > > > automatically added. > > > > > > - It was suggested to handle this with (SG|X)ML attributes on like > > > done in the release documentation for different architectures. > > > simon was volunteered to implement this. > > > > The DocBook XSL stylesheets call this 'profiling'. See > > > > http://docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl/current/doc/html/rn19.html > > > > for more details. > > Very interesting, I didn't know about that. Thanks! I'll read up on it too. > > > All the changes discussed so far will also require updates to the > > Primer. Who volunteered to keep that up to date? > > I don't think these changes will require major rewrite of the Primer, > but of course the Primer need to be updated accordingly. The primer is already very out of date. Once I offered to update it but that was too great a task and no one from doceng@ seemed as if they wanted to explicity point out the policy on issues. -- Tom Rhodes
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041202160251.269d9078>