David Crossley wrote:
David Crossley wrote:
David Crossley wrote:
Dave Brondsema wrote:
/docs/dev/ nested below /docs/ seems weird. I think it would be better to host the current stable release at a url like: /docs/0.7/. This would also permit us to keep documentation for all old releases (although we would probably want warnings on them if they are too old).
0.6 docs had to be kept at /docs/ because they didn't have a split docs/site structure so I kept it as-is. I had been thinking we'd move to something like /docs/0.7/ for future releases, but I can't find any discussion about this in particular.
We probably jumped to the conclusion that we only would have the current release and the current dev version.
I agree with this new approach. So would it be like this ...
Assuming that we don't want to version the top-level docs.
Is that a legitimate assumption? It would change our layout if we do. I don't know the answer yet either.
f.a.o/ ... the top-level docs, from trunk/site-author f.a.o/docs/ ... is .htaccess to redirect to current release docs. f.a.o/docs/0.6/ ... from the forrest_06_branch (*) f.a.o/docs/0.7/ ... from the forrest_07_branch, when it is released f.a.o/docs/0.8/ ... the next development, from future trunk/docs-author/
Let us see what the other solution would be. (Say that "current release" is 0.7)
f.a.o/ ... the top-level docs, .htaccess to redirect to 0.7 top-level f.a.o/docs/ ... .htaccess to redirect to 0.7/docs/ f.a.o/0.6/ ... from the forrest_06_branch f.a.o/0.6/docs/ ... from the forrest_06_branch f.a.o/0.7/ ... from the forrest_07_branch/site-author/ f.a.o/0.7/docs/ ... from the forrest_07_branch/docs-author/ f.a.o/0.8/ ... the next development, from the trunk/site-author/ f.a.o/0.8/docs/ ... from the trunk/docs-author/
I have done local tests with both methods. The second way seems much easier and leaves more scope for the future. To use the first way, would also mean a re-structure of the docs part of forrest_06_branch.
--David
Furthering this idea, if we are versioning and storing docs-author and site-author, do we really need to store them seperately? As you said, this method would mean we won't have to restructure the forrest_06_branch docs into two parts.
-- Dave Brondsema : [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.splike.com : programming http://csx.calvin.edu : student org http://www.brondsema.net : personal
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
