cvs commit: doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/committers-guide
article.sgml doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/releng article.sgml
trhodes at FreeBSD.org
Sun Aug 17 12:44:05 UTC 2008
On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 20:47:50 +0900 (JST)
Hiroki Sato <hrs at FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> Gabor PALI <pgj at FreeBSD.org> wrote
> in <48A75B1A.7060809 at FreeBSD.org>:
> pg> Hiroki Sato wrote:
> pg> > What is the reason why choosing not updating the article?
> pg> Please, see  and , and my commits following this one .
> pg> Everybody (Remko, Joel, Gabor) I asked, supported the idea, so I felt it
> pg> is time to get the job done. I take all the responsibility for them.
> Sorry, I was a bit behind the discussion because of a trip in the
> last week. I am still not sure if removing them from doc is better
> or not even after reading the thread. Moving all of them into www
> (or doc), or having them on the both of www and doc would be a
> reasonable idea, but moving only the team information into www does
> not agree with the reason why we have article/contributors.
> No offense and no explicit objection from me here. I am just nervous
> about handling this sort of information which can be used in our
> document more than once.
> Gabor Kovesdan <gabor at kovesdan.org> wrote
> in <48A8001E.1000104 at kovesdan.org>:
> ga> separately, so I think it would be complicated to implement. I think
> ga> there are other overlapping parts, like &os; and the current release
> ga> entities. Maybe it would make sense to separate them to a common part
> ga> somehow and use it for the web and the doc?
> Yes, I think we should go for that direction somehow. And in a long
> term, maybe we should merge www and doc into a single repository
> (like www/en -> doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/htdocs or so) because of making
> reuse of information easier. Currently www build heavily depends on
> doc tree (www only build can be done but the result is not complete),
> so I think the merged repository with an option for htdocs-only build
> would also work without a serious problem.
I've honestly liked the idea of merging them for awhile now.
> BTW, for teams/hats related information, what do you think about
> adding files including who it is on per developer basis? An
> experimental one for showing the concept is attached. It includes
> pgpkey, hats, commit bit array, mentors, and location. Most of
> member descriptions of teams/hats can be generated from the files,
> and also the traditional first commit by a new committer can be
Since hats do not change that often, this is probably a worthwhile
path to walk.
More information about the cvs-all