Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2008 20:47:50 +0900 (JST) From: Hiroki Sato <hrs@FreeBSD.org> To: pgj@FreeBSD.org, gabor@kovesdan.org Cc: doc-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-doc@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/committers-guide article.sgml doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/releng article.sgml doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/developers-handbook/policies chapter.sgml Message-ID: <20080817.204750.78468138.hrs@allbsd.org> In-Reply-To: <48A75B1A.7060809@FreeBSD.org> <48A8001E.1000104@kovesdan.org> References: <200808162142.m7GLgaAQ086124@repoman.freebsd.org> <20080817.073048.238614512.hrs@allbsd.org> <48A75B1A.7060809@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
----Security_Multipart0(Sun_Aug_17_20_47_50_2008_988)-- Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; boundary="--Next_Part(Sun_Aug_17_20_47_50_2008_640)--" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ----Next_Part(Sun_Aug_17_20_47_50_2008_640)-- Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Gabor PALI <pgj@FreeBSD.org> wrote in <48A75B1A.7060809@FreeBSD.org>: pg> Hiroki Sato wrote: pg> > What is the reason why choosing not updating the article? pg> pg> Please, see [1] and [2], and my commits following this one [3][4]. pg> Everybody (Remko, Joel, Gabor) I asked, supported the idea, so I felt it pg> is time to get the job done. I take all the responsibility for them. Sorry, I was a bit behind the discussion because of a trip in the last week. I am still not sure if removing them from doc is better or not even after reading the thread. Moving all of them into www (or doc), or having them on the both of www and doc would be a reasonable idea, but moving only the team information into www does not agree with the reason why we have article/contributors. No offense and no explicit objection from me here. I am just nervous about handling this sort of information which can be used in our document more than once. Gabor Kovesdan <gabor@kovesdan.org> wrote in <48A8001E.1000104@kovesdan.org>: ga> separately, so I think it would be complicated to implement. I think ga> there are other overlapping parts, like &os; and the current release ga> entities. Maybe it would make sense to separate them to a common part ga> somehow and use it for the web and the doc? Yes, I think we should go for that direction somehow. And in a long term, maybe we should merge www and doc into a single repository (like www/en -> doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/htdocs or so) because of making reuse of information easier. Currently www build heavily depends on doc tree (www only build can be done but the result is not complete), so I think the merged repository with an option for htdocs-only build would also work without a serious problem. BTW, for teams/hats related information, what do you think about adding files including who it is on per developer basis? An experimental one for showing the concept is attached. It includes pgpkey, hats, commit bit array, mentors, and location. Most of member descriptions of teams/hats can be generated from the files, and also the traditional first commit by a new committer can be simplified. -- | Hiroki SATO ----Next_Part(Sun_Aug_17_20_47_50_2008_640)---- ----Security_Multipart0(Sun_Aug_17_20_47_50_2008_988)-- Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (FreeBSD) iEYEABECAAYFAkioD+YACgkQTyzT2CeTzy3lnQCfTbKqoNRP5WVuy0heuFUUfNSQ aL4An1aKU52xcpFkeDIZHlaOoPGExOfl =CwCD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ----Security_Multipart0(Sun_Aug_17_20_47_50_2008_988)----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080817.204750.78468138.hrs>