Thomas Lockhart writes:
> There is nothing stopping Marc from running the docs generation
> explicitly just before release. The group permissions in my docs build
> area are set to allow this.
That's kind of what I meant, only instead of "Marc running the docs
generation explicitly just before r
> All in all it's a synchronization and communication problem, but it's a
> real problem, as history shows.
There is nothing stopping Marc from running the docs generation
explicitly just before release. The group permissions in my docs build
area are set to allow this.
Also, since the hardcopy
On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, Thomas Lockhart wrote:
> > All in all it's a synchronization and communication problem, but it's a
> > real problem, as history shows.
>
> There is nothing stopping Marc from running the docs generation
> explicitly just before release. The group permissions in my docs build
Thomas Lockhart writes:
> [valid reasons why docs are shipped in tar.gz format]
>
> Anyway, since we no longer put the docs tarball into cvs, then we could
> rethink the techniques. Peter, you seem to have done enough work on this
> to have an opinion, so what exactly would you prefer for packagi
Thomas Lockhart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ... and find the *every* .htm file has a "good" name. Hmm. Is it the
> fact that someone went through and added an "id field" to every chapter
> and section header? Whoever it was, good job! It wasn't me, but whoever
> it was: good job :)
> Ah, a peru
> Is there any prospect of making the output filenames more predictable?
> Who should I annoy about it?
Well, you could annoy me about it...
... and I would go to my local installation of the source tree...
... and build the docs to confirm that the *chapters* have good
predictable names...
..
Thomas Lockhart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [ various good reasons ]
> 3) We put the docs into cvs, but the jade/docbook output did not have
> predictable file names. So each release would require wiping the output
> docs and somehow guessing which files were obsolete and which were new.
That'
> > Another thing we should think about is to not tar.gz the documentation
> > files. That way we could create useful incremental diffs between releases
> > later on. Any comments here?
> I've never figured out why we do that.
Well...
> Since the thing is going to be
> inside a tarball anyway,
On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, Martin A. Marques wrote:
> On Thursday 07 December 2000 16:48, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> > Okay, since I haven't gotten word back on where to find the docs for v7.1,
> > it still contains those for v7.0, but I just put up beta1 tarballs in the
> > /pub/dev directory ... can s
On Thursday 07 December 2000 18:35, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> Ideally (IMHO) we'd build the documentation right in place when making the
> distribution tarball, i.e., broken docs, no release. I'm not sure how to
> usefully extrapolate that to the snapshot builds, though.
>
> Another thing we sh
Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Another thing we should think about is to not tar.gz the documentation
> files. That way we could create useful incremental diffs between releases
> later on. Any comments here?
I've never figured out why we do that. Since the thing is going to be
The Hermit Hacker writes:
> Okay, since I haven't gotten word back on where to find the docs for v7.1,
/home/projects/pgsql/ftp/www/html/devel-corner/docs
Ideally (IMHO) we'd build the documentation right in place when making the
distribution tarball, i.e., broken docs, no release. I'm not sur
The Hermit Hacker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> it still contains those for v7.0, but I just put up beta1 tarballs in the
> /pub/dev directory ... can someone take a look at these before we announce
> them to make sure they look okay?
The tarballs match what I have locally ... ship 'em ...
On Thursday 07 December 2000 16:48, The Hermit Hacker wrote:
> Okay, since I haven't gotten word back on where to find the docs for v7.1,
> it still contains those for v7.0, but I just put up beta1 tarballs in the
> /pub/dev directory ... can someone take a look at these before we announce
> them
Okay, since I haven't gotten word back on where to find the docs for v7.1,
it still contains those for v7.0, but I just put up beta1 tarballs in the
/pub/dev directory ... can someone take a look at these before we announce
them to make sure they look okay?
Marc G. Fournier IC
15 matches
Mail list logo
