Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 28 Aug 1999 22:37:40 +1200
From:      "Dan Langille" <junkmale@xtra.co.nz>
To:        Nik Clayton <nik@freebsd.org>
Cc:        doc@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Supporting non-DocBook documents in the tree
Message-ID:  <19990828104217.PUYK3442178.mta1-rme@wocker>
In-Reply-To: <19990827132242.A26830@kilt.nothing-going-on.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 27 Aug 99, at 13:22, Nik Clayton wrote:

> Specifically, I'm thinking of the sort of author who's just made a bit of a
> breakthrough on something ("How I got my mumblefrozz card working under
> FreeBSD") and wants to contribute that to the project.  They've written it
> up in either plain text, or HTML, and that's what they send us.  Their
> point of view is that they're doing us a favour, and that they shouldn't
> have to spend more of their time learning DocBook before we'll take their
> article.  I think this is a wholly understandable point of view.

I think it's a good idea to accept non DocBook stuff.

> I get the impression that we're currently viewed as being a bit 
> inflexible about the formats that we accept documentation in, and that even
> when we do accept submissions, it takes us a while to get around to
> converting them to DocBook.  This is mostly due to lack of manpower.

What is the main reason for using DocBook as opposed to some other format?
--
Dan Langille - DVL Software Limited
The FreeBSD Diary     - http://www.FreeBSDDiary.org/freebsd/
NZ FreeBSD User Group - http://www.nzfug.nz.freebsd.org/
The Racing System     - http://www.racingsystem.com/racingsystem.htm


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?19990828104217.PUYK3442178.mta1-rme>