On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 09:27:54AM +0100, Frans Pop wrote: > On Thursday 16 December 2004 01:43, Frank Lichtenheld wrote: > > No, this isn't correct. The current structure is > > 1.) releases/stable/releasenotes.<lang>.html > > 2.) releases/stable/installmanual.<lang>.html > > 3.) releases/stable/<arch>/*.<lang>.* > > 4.) releases/stable/<arch>/release-notes.<lang>.* > > 5.) releases/stable/<arch>/release-notes/*.<lang>.html > > Hmm. I miss http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/i386/install (same for > other arches) in your list; these are linked from the list at the top of > http://www.debian.org/releases/stable/installmanual and seems to be the > URL where content negotiation takes place. I guess these URLs contain > index.<lang>.html links to the releases/stable/<arch>/install.<lang>.html > files.
please note that /releases/stable/i386/install as an URL is mapped by apache to a file releases/stable/i386/install.<lang>.html. So there are no explicit links for that, apache chooses the file. install.<lang>.html is covered by point 3). I t is just the first page of the installation manual. index.<lang>.html seems to be a page for the CD version. AFAICS it is not build from the installmanual's sources (It seems to be HTML written "by hand" ;) and is not linked from anywhere in the webpage. > > > Note however that currently the build system in that branch does > > > not allow building pdf or txt files. > > > How can we work around this? > > > > merge the change to the branch? I see no way around this. > > This will have to be OK'ed by Joey Hess. We should definetly try this IMO and I'm willing to help if there is anything I can do there. Is this a risk for the image building? Otherwise I couldn't see a reason not to do it. > > > - - There will probably be major changes to the manual > > > (restructuring) after Sarge is released that are relevant. Do we want > > > to rebuild the manual after release for the website? > > > > We could think about doing that and placing the result in the etch/ > > directory. > > I was thinking of changes that are relevant for Sarge as well. Everybody > agrees that the manual for Sarge is far from optimal. But then these changes should happen in the sarge branch, too. Or you have to create a sarge-webpages branch if you want to protect the version used in the images from too many changes. > Your suggestion would work for any changes in the manual that relate to > post-Sarge changes in the functionality of d-i. Indeed. > > > - - Should rebuilds (if we want them) be triggered automatically or > > > started manually? > > > What are the implications of this for translations of the website? > > > My preference would be manually because that would make it possible > > > to check the status of translations first and allow to keep the build > > > scripts simpler. > > > > How many people will be able to trigger the build? Hopefully enough... > > Depends on where the building process would be hosted and how complex we > make the script. I would suggest keeping the script as simple as possible > and add a README with instructions for publishing the results. > > If we decide to build manually I could do the builds at home and make a > tarbal available to d-www people. That should work to start with. Ok, this will be left for the webmasters (and d-admins) to decide :/ We should really try to find a Debian controlled machine to build the thing on (which would also allow to rsync it instead of getting a tarball). Hmm, perhaps build it in a chroot? If someone would make a list which packages/versions of packages the installmanual needs that aren't available in woody, this would be appreciated. Gruesse, -- Frank Lichtenheld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> www: http://www.djpig.de/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
