Re: [viff-devel] viff.dk: 4 new changesets
viff-devel@viff.dk writes: Hello! > http://hg.viff.dk/viff.dk/rev/bb098464f71d > changeset: 32:bb098464f71d > user: Martin Geisler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > date: Tue Feb 19 20:03:52 2008 +0100 > summary: Sorted bibliography. > > [...] I have implemented a notification script that runs when new changesets are pushed to the viff and viff.dk repositories. Then I can stop feeling that I need to write a separate mail every time I commit something worth sharing... I don't know if you like such mails -- my intention is that they will come in much smaller numbers than the usual CVS/SVN commit mail spam! Here you will only receive a mail when I push stuff to the repositories, and I will try to only do that when I have accumulated a good amount of changesets. So something like a mail a day or less. If there is demand for it, then we can create another mailinglist for these mails. Then we could also include the diff in them if you like? > http://hg.viff.dk/viff.dk/rev/ce1e14b5d2a9 > changeset: 34:ce1e14b5d2a9 > user: Martin Geisler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > date: Tue Feb 19 21:26:51 2008 +0100 > summary: Re-enabled rollover image by public demand! The "public demand" was Rune and Gert who started talking about "bugs" and "regressions" on the homepage after the switch to Docutils... I hope you're happy now! :-) -- Martin Geisler pgp4k4FWrwXkw.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ viff-devel mailing list (http://viff.dk/) viff-devel@viff.dk http://lists.viff.dk/listinfo.cgi/viff-devel-viff.dk
[viff-devel] viff: 2 new changesets
http://hg.viff.dk/viff/rev/5e18dc77b09b changeset: 440:5e18dc77b09b user: Martin Geisler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> date: Tue Feb 19 23:08:38 2008 +0100 summary: Add Bracha broadcast to the keyword list. http://hg.viff.dk/viff/rev/a318522fe51d changeset: 441:a318522fe51d user: Martin Geisler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> date: Tue Feb 19 23:10:49 2008 +0100 summary: Add "secret" to module docstring. ___ viff-devel mailing list (http://viff.dk/) viff-devel@viff.dk http://lists.viff.dk/listinfo.cgi/viff-devel-viff.dk
[viff-devel] viff.dk: 4 new changesets
http://hg.viff.dk/viff.dk/rev/bb098464f71d changeset: 32:bb098464f71d user: Martin Geisler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> date: Tue Feb 19 20:03:52 2008 +0100 summary: Sorted bibliography. http://hg.viff.dk/viff.dk/rev/4800789fd621 changeset: 33:4800789fd621 user: Martin Geisler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> date: Tue Feb 19 20:38:15 2008 +0100 summary: Draw attention to the millionaires.py example. http://hg.viff.dk/viff.dk/rev/ce1e14b5d2a9 changeset: 34:ce1e14b5d2a9 user: Martin Geisler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> date: Tue Feb 19 21:26:51 2008 +0100 summary: Re-enabled rollover image by public demand! http://hg.viff.dk/viff.dk/rev/0c5cba5e53d8 changeset: 35:0c5cba5e53d8 user: Martin Geisler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> date: Tue Feb 19 22:00:59 2008 +0100 summary: Wrapped a long URL. Docutils removes all whitespace in URLs, so they can be broken across lines as necessary to ensure a readable file. ___ viff-devel mailing list (http://viff.dk/) viff-devel@viff.dk http://lists.viff.dk/listinfo.cgi/viff-devel-viff.dk
Re: [viff-devel] Where to put the documentation?
Mikkel Krøigård <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> It would definitely be better to have an online HTML file. I think we >> should replace the the INSTALL file with a simple one like that: >> >> Installation Instructions >> == >> >> Please see http://viff.dk/installation.html >> >> What do people think of a scheme like this? Is it okay to ship the >> releases with pointers to the web documentation? > The solution seems very simple to me. Include instructions both on the > download page and in the INSTALL file. Yes, I think we should do that too -- so I think we should move the documentation to the website repository where we will rewrite it as reStructuredText documents. Since these documents are quite readable as-is, we can simply copy them to the release. That way we wont have to maintain two files with the installation guide. Of course we need to write the installation instructions with care if we want them to do double duty like that. But I think it should be no problem. I would like to move the NEWS (already duplicated on the homepage), AUTHORS (so that we can link to it from the footer of the pages), and TODO (maybe call it a road-map?), and INSTALL files like that. I think we can leave the README file behind since we probably want different content in that compared to the frontpage of the website. Since the website is ultra-portable, then we might want to bundle all the documentation under /docs in a release? Oh, and should I have named the directory /doc instead? That would have been short for "documentation" whereas /docs must be short for "documents" which is actually not what I intented. -- Martin Geisler pgpdAwGnmuHlj.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ viff-devel mailing list (http://viff.dk/) viff-devel@viff.dk http://lists.viff.dk/listinfo.cgi/viff-devel-viff.dk
Re: [viff-devel] Where to put the documentation?
> It would definitely be better to have an online HTML file. I think we > should replace the the INSTALL file with a simple one like that: > > Installation Instructions > == > > Please see http://viff.dk/installation.html > > What do people think of a scheme like this? Is it okay to ship the > releases with pointers to the web documentation? The solution seems very simple to me. Include instructions both on the download page and in the INSTALL file. ___ viff-devel mailing list (http://viff.dk/) viff-devel@viff.dk http://lists.viff.dk/listinfo.cgi/viff-devel-viff.dk
[viff-devel] Where to put the documentation?
Hello everybody, Mikkel and I have been discussing where it is best to put the documentation. Mikkel pointed out that it is somewhat cumbersome to follow the current installation instructions since they are in the form of a simple INSTALL file -- the frontpage points to http://hg.viff.dk/viff/raw-file/tip/INSTALL >From there the user must select each link, paste it in the address bar and download the right package. It would definitely be better to have an online HTML file. I think we should replace the the INSTALL file with a simple one like that: Installation Instructions == Please see http://viff.dk/installation.html What do people think of a scheme like this? Is it okay to ship the releases with pointers to the web documentation? Since we have the website in reStructuredText format, we could also include (part of) it in the releases. That might be the best overall solution since it would ensure that users have the correct documentation present when downloading a release. (I just wanted to put this out here so that Mikkel and I do not sit here in our office and decide everything ourselves...) -- Martin Geisler ___ viff-devel mailing list (http://viff.dk/) viff-devel@viff.dk http://lists.viff.dk/listinfo.cgi/viff-devel-viff.dk
