Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 20:58:10 +0200 From: Gabor Kovesdan <gabor@kovesdan.org> To: Hiroki Sato <hrs@FreeBSD.org> Cc: pgj@FreeBSD.org, 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: <48A9C642.8030504@kovesdan.org> In-Reply-To: <20080817.204750.78468138.hrs@allbsd.org> References: <200808162142.m7GLgaAQ086124@repoman.freebsd.org> <20080817.073048.238614512.hrs@allbsd.org> <48A75B1A.7060809@FreeBSD.org> <20080817.204750.78468138.hrs@allbsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 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. > Yes, I agree, that would be nice to have, especially because that detailed contributors list as a single DocBook document looked well. > 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. > Good idea. And we can have a website.ent in share/sgml, just like articles.ent and books.ent to easily pull in the necessary entities. About this I have more ideas as I've been looking at the opportunities with XML. I already have something in a local repo, but it's highly wip. I think that doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/share/sgml should only contain some "glue" .ent files, for example imho newsgroups.ent should go into doc/share/sgml so that translators can use them in an early phase of the translation or simply reuse them if there is something to reuse. > 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. > The idea seems good, but with the DTD I have some ideas and doubts: - We have the location data in ports/astro/xearth, in this way we would introduce one more duplication - We have the birthday data in src/usr.bin/calendar, which may not be a problem as it cannot change - If someone leaves core and returns, or simply resigns his commit bit and returns the from-to attributes cannot be precise. Or maybe we could for example merge 1995-1997 and 1999-2000 as 1995-2000? - There might be a website or comment element or attribute to put personal websites or additional info (e.g. we have at least 2 deceased committers) Regards, Gabor
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?48A9C642.8030504>