Hello,
I'm thinking about advantages and disadvantages of write the
description of the packages using XML.
I think using XML the descriptions can be rendered in different form
for text and graphical tools. The URL of the descriptions can be real
links and, even and the project thinks it is
On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 02:40:07PM +0200, Fernando Cerezal wrote:
Hello,
I'm thinking about advantages and disadvantages of write the
description of the packages using XML.
Personally, I would hate this. I've written too many ant build.xml
scripts to think that writing XML by hand is even a
Twas brillig at 14:40:07 25.05.2008 UTC+02 when Fernando Cerezal did gyre and
gimble:
FC I think using XML the descriptions can be rendered in different
FC form for text and graphical tools.
Same for current format. Just use perl/python/whatever instead of XSLT.
FC The URL of the
2008/5/25 Roberto C. Sánchez [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 02:40:07PM +0200, Fernando Cerezal wrote:
Hello,
I'm thinking about advantages and disadvantages of write the
description of the packages using XML.
Personally, I would hate this. I've written too many ant build.xml
On Sun, 2008-05-25 at 08:46 -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 02:40:07PM +0200, Fernando Cerezal wrote:
Hello,
I'm thinking about advantages and disadvantages of write the
description of the packages using XML.
Personally, I would hate this. I've written too many
On Sun, 2008-05-25 at 15:07 +0200, Fernando Cerezal wrote:
2008/5/25 Roberto C. Sánchez [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 02:40:07PM +0200, Fernando Cerezal wrote:
Yes, you are right. However, currently the translations of the Debian
website are being done by hand, so there is the
On Sun, 25 May 2008 08:29:56 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
What's an extra few MB plus parsing overhead when everyone has
250GB HDDs, multi-core 64-bit CPUs and 2+GB RAM?
Well, and what about !i386, !amd64 and !powerpc ? ;)
--
. ''`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
:
On Sun, 2008-05-25 at 08:29 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
13 x 10 x 20,000 = bloat.
It would probably be more like one paragraph per item/item.
Still far too much.
Now that really is out of the question - please remember that the
packages descriptions go into the dpkg database which is
On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 08:46:22AM -0400, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 02:40:07PM +0200, Fernando Cerezal wrote:
I'm thinking about advantages and disadvantages of write the
description of the packages using XML.
Personally, I would hate this. I've written too many ant
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/25/08 08:17, Neil Williams wrote:
On Sun, 2008-05-25 at 15:07 +0200, Fernando Cerezal wrote:
[snip]
itemA description with lines/item
Is an extra 13 characters per line, per description, per package.
13 x 10 x 20,000 = bloat.
It would
Am Sonntag, den 25.05.2008, 14:40 +0200 schrieb Fernando Cerezal:
I'm thinking about advantages and disadvantages of write the
description of the packages using XML.
I like XML but it's a huge pain to write by hand. The current format is
easy to read, easy to write and easy to parse. This is
2008/5/25 Manuel Prinz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Am Sonntag, den 25.05.2008, 14:40 +0200 schrieb Fernando Cerezal:
I'm thinking about advantages and disadvantages of write the
description of the packages using XML.
I like XML but it's a huge pain to write by hand. The current format is
easy to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/25/08 08:34, David Paleino wrote:
On Sun, 25 May 2008 08:29:56 -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
What's an extra few MB plus parsing overhead when everyone has
250GB HDDs, multi-core 64-bit CPUs and 2+GB RAM?
Well, and what about !i386, !amd64
First of all, I did not get it in my first reply that you spoke from a
translaters point of view. I just have a very limited view on
translation work, so my arguments may not be correct.
Am Sonntag, den 25.05.2008, 16:05 +0200 schrieb Fernando Cerezal:
How can a program know if
* A
On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 08:29:56AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
What's an extra few MB plus parsing overhead when everyone has
250GB HDDs, multi-core 64-bit CPUs and 2+GB RAM?
Huh?. Why commit good machines to the landfill?
--
Chris.
==
One, with God, is always a majority, but many a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/25/08 13:03, Chris Bannister wrote:
On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 08:29:56AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
What's an extra few MB plus parsing overhead when everyone has
250GB HDDs, multi-core 64-bit CPUs and 2+GB RAM?
Huh?. Why commit good
16 matches
Mail list logo
