Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 12 Jan 2003 17:55:45 +0100
From:      Udo Erdelhoff <ue@nathan.ruhr.de>
To:        freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: 5.0 release docs (was Re: HEADSUP: doc/ tree tagging)
Message-ID:  <20030112165544.GD66579@nathan.ruhr.de>
In-Reply-To: <200301121620.h0CGKJT1060605@intruder.bmah.org>
References:  <20030110124620.GB91718@nathan.ruhr.de> <200301101643.h0AGh3cO028415@intruder.bmah.org> <200301102123.h0ALNFIf031693@intruder.bmah.org> <20030110221508.GE91718@nathan.ruhr.de> <200301110435.h0B4Zbx5038652@intruder.bmah.org> <20030111172153.GA375@straylight.oblivion.bg> <200301111736.h0BHaxph047160@intruder.bmah.org> <20030112103609.GC371@straylight.oblivion.bg> <20030112141819.GC66579@nathan.ruhr.de> <200301121620.h0CGKJT1060605@intruder.bmah.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jan 12, 2003 at 08:20:19AM -0800, Bruce A. Mah wrote:
> I was not so concerned about making the translation teams track this
> change on short notice (they don't).  I was more worried about the new
> attributes adding a bunch of deltas that are not immediately
> distinguishable from real content changes that *do* need to be tracked.

Hmm, did I overlook something?  As far as I remember, the changes were
basically limited to adding id-attributes to various opening tags.
At worst, they may also add #foo to some link entities.

> (Put it this way...you're in the middle of managing a bunch of
> translations, but not done yet.  Suddenly you see new deltas for twenty
> files show up.  Unless you actually look at each one of them, how do 
> you know which ones need to be tracked and which ones do not?)

From the cvs comment, of course.
 
> Ah...sorry, it's not obvious to me at all.  :-p

I *do* need new glasses, it seems.  Or did I try to make reality make
my wishes.  Anyway, I will take a closer look once the local web build
has finished- 
 
> On both the en_US and de_DE Web sites, it looks to me like the release
> documentation pages reference the html-split files, not html.  So don't
> you mean to get rid of html?

Nope, the idea is to get rid of html-split.
 
> (Gratuitous comment:  I don't like html-split for the release
> documentation because it's too hard to do intra-document searches.  But
> that's an issue for another time.)

Exactly that is one of the reasons why I want to get rid of html-split.
The other is that there is next to no good reason for html-split,
because as far as the release notes are concerned, it just produces
one or two files with 2-3% of the content and one big file with the
remainder.  And the split points do not make sense to me at all.
 
> No problem.  Basically, we'd do the cleanup and then immediately run a
> rebuild.

Talking about rebuilds:  I think it would be a good idea to change the
web site build to
a) do complete builds (i.e. remove all checked-out copies and rebuild
   everythin) only ONCE per Sunday, not during every run on Sunday
b) build the non-english versions more often than twice per day.

/s/Udo
-- 
"There are only a few problems in this world that cannot be solved by the
correct application of a sufficient amount of high explosives" - a.s.r.

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?20030112165544.GD66579>