Dave Brondsema wrote: > [snip] > 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.
Good point. This separation is actually causing grief for the off-line docs, as we cannot link from one to the other. I looked back through the email threads on FOR-391 and it seems that we made an assumption leap to have the docs-author and site-author split. There was a passing comment that we might have it like Cocoon where they have a completely separate svn:cocoon/site/ to hold the top-level docs. We didn't talk about the consequences. So coming back to the current proposal, the only issue that i see is that we will have multiple versions of the top-level docs. I don't see that as a problem because we will have multiple versions of /docs/ anyway and they will have a banner saying "this is version x.y". --David
