Simon L. Nielsen ha scritto:
On 2008.08.17 20:47:50 +0900, Hiroki Sato wrote:
Gabor Kovesdan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
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.
I have no general problem with merging www and doc closer (might be
done while considering moving to svn?) and fully requiring having both
for build of either, but having e.g. www/en as a deep subdir of doc/
seems like a rather bad idea to me.
The web site and and doc/ are rather differnet beast wrt. how you
write content so I see no problem having it in seperate top level
directories.
Yes, SVN would be a nice idea!
As for the diversity, I'm planning to work on doc to redesign it a bit
using XML and newer DocBook and this will reduce the diversity. Of
course, not completely as HTML and DocBook tags are quite different, but
having everything in XML markup everything will be more uniform. Your
point have sense, but personally I like the idea of having web in the
language directories, because in this way the structure seems more
consistent to me. You just enter the directory and you see the types of
documentation, which could be currently: books, articles, web, slides,
flyer.
Gabor
_______________________________________________
cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
