In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Oliver Elphick" <[email protected]> writes: > Adam Di Carlo wrote: >> I feel that a DDP (and <URL:http://www.debian.org/devel/>, while >> we're at it) which is permeated with stale documents not so marked >> gives the whole DDP the appearance of turpitude and staleness. >> >> Also, for documentation which is actually not maintained via DDP, >> I've fixed or disabled the linkages and removed it from the >> autobuild system. > Thank you, Adam. That is a job that has long needed doing.
Speaking of which, I fixed the autobuild system and shoved in makefiles for all the non-dead document directories under manuals.sgml, as you may have noticied. BTW, the standard.makefile is used unchanged for all of them! BTW, if anyone's curious, I also changed the manuals.sgml autobuild system so that (theoretically) you can install HTML versions of the manuals *anywhere* you want. It allows you to override PUBLISHDIR in the individual document directories. Not tested! >> Alright, here's the list of packages I so marked as stalled. > ... >> * Debian Tips --- we should just reap this one; it's not going to >> happen. I mean, shouldn't it be part of the admin or user's manual >> or FAQ anyhow? > Tips are provided by the FAQ-O-MATIC. However, I understand that > the FAQ-O-MATIC can only be accessed online. Can its new maintainer > consider extracting the various data and publishing them as a > package for those whose net access is expensive? Hmm. The cvs package, upstream, comes with dumps from a FAQ-O-Matic, I think. So it can be done. -- .....Adam Di [EMAIL PROTECTED]<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>
