>I'd would prefer if we distinguish between "website" and "documentation" >as I think they are actually different. I've had an impression that we've actually been pulling these together, so your idea is somewhat revolutionary to me :)
Cheers, Nadya >-----Original Message----- >From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Friday, December 08, 2006 8:17 PM >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: FW: [doc][drlvm][classlib] trunk has old doc files > > > >Morozova, Nadezhda wrote: >> As a result, some docs are distributed with code and copied to site, >> some are stored at the site only, and some are duplicated and require >> syncing. >> >> I can do the cleanup to find files that exist in two variants and try >> the merge, but I need to know where we're merging them to. Which option >> do we prefer? >> 1. Continue storing docs in the trunk of code and set up externals >> copying for all classlib docs and for drlvm docs? >> 2. Remove all docs out of trunk and store on the site only? >> >> I'd vote for 2 - because this seems simpler and unambiguous and fewer >> copies of files actually exist. However, I'd go with what gurus say. > >I actually don't care, as long as there is only one copy which people >work on (which is the case now). > >I'd would prefer if we distinguish between "website" and "documentation" >as I think they are actually different. > >geir > > >> >> Cheers, >> Nadya >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Morozova, Nadezhda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 5:26 PM >> To: [email protected]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: RE: [doc][drlvm] trunk has old doc files >> >>> If there are duplicates, yes. I thought we were using the externals to >>> get to stuff to *avoid* duplication. >> >> Yes, though I am not 100% sure we never broke that rule. Will >> investigate. >> Anyway, what I wanted to say is - if you suggest that we remove the docs >> from the trunk because they're on the site, we can probably do the same >> for classlib. If you notice, my second alternative was to adopt the >> classlib practice of using externals. Just which one is preferred? >> >>> I'd like to hear what others think too... >> Ok, I'm taking a break with this ;) >> >> Cheers, >> Nadya >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 5:22 PM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [doc][drlvm] trunk has old doc files >>> >>> >>> >>> Morozova, Nadezhda wrote: >>>>>> - removing the docs from the directory: can have links to the >> website >>>> in >>>>>> README instead >>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>> Can we adopt the same for classlib and stop using svn externals? >>> If there are duplicates, yes. I thought we were using the externals to >>> get to stuff to *avoid* duplication. >>> >>> Just so I'm not confusing things, can you give me an example ? >>> >>> >>> I'd like to hear what others think too... >>> >>> geir >>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Nadya >>>> >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 4:42 PM >>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>> Subject: Re: [doc][drlvm] trunk has old doc files >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Morozova, Nadezhda wrote: >>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>> >>>>>> The directory drlvm/trunk/vm/doc has the old documents Getting >>>> Started >>>>>> and Developer's guide. These have not been updated for a while and >>>> use >>>>>> the old style sheet. Fresher versions are available on the website. >>>>>> >>>>>> I suggest that we fix the inconsistency by: >>>>>> >>>>>> - removing the docs from the directory: can have links to the >> website >>>> in >>>>>> README instead >>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>>>> or >>>>>> >>>>>> - copying the latest doc versions from site to svn vm/doc directory >>>> and >>>>>> using svn externals to hook up to site (as is done for some >> classlib >>>>>> docs) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> What do you say? >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, Nadya >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>
