Greetings, * Michael Paquier (mich...@paquier.xyz) wrote: > On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 08:42:34PM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote: > > If we go down this route, the master branch should probably link to the > > regularly built devel documentation, so that if/when we do make such a > > change, we'll point people at the updated documentation too. > > I don't know how others feel about such things, so I may be > overengineering a simple problem as well :) > > Also, I have not looked in details at the perl tools used to change the > version number in the tree, but we'd likely want a solution which > updates automatically the README also in this case depending on the > version number, perhaps also making sure that for a git repository with > the master branch in use we don't want to point to the development > version of the docs.
Updating version_stamp.pl should be pretty straight-forward to have it also update the README for the back-branches and it shouldn't be hard to teach it how to ignore the README on the master branch. As for what's in the README on the master branch, I was saying that it *should* point to the development documentation, since that should be current with whatever is actually in the git repo (or only a day behind or such). Thanks! Stephen
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
