RFC: Release notes rearrangement

[Christian Brueffer]

On Tue, Nov 21, 2006 at 11:06:59AM -0800, Bruce A. Mah wrote:
> If memory serves me right, Christian Brueffer wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 20, 2006 at 08:01:53PM -0800, Bruce A. Mah wrote:
> > [...]
> >> To address these problems I'd like to collapse all of the MD documents
> >> into a single set of MI documents.  For paragraphs (sections,
> >> whatever) that only apply to given architectures, we'd simply add
> >> in-line text indicating this, something like:
> >>
> >> 	[i386] Some sentence applying only to i386.
> >>
> > 
> > Hmm, what I like about the current notes is that if I'm only interested
> > in on arch, I just get the stuff that concerns this specific arch.  From
> > what you describe here it sounds like this:
> > 
> > [i386] Some sentence applying only to i386.
> > 
> > [amd64] Some sentence applying only to amd64.
> > 
> > [arm] Some sentence applying only to arm.
> > 
> > [sparc64] Some sentence applying only to sparc64.
> > 
> > [i386] Some sentence applying only to i386.
> > 
> > Of course many items are general, but I think we want to avoid clutter
> > like this.  Do you have something in mind for this?  Maybe put all the
> > arch specific stuff in special arch sections below all the generic
> > stuff?
> > 
> > OTOH, maybe I've just completely misunderstood you :-)
> 
> Hey Christian--
> 
> You understood me correctly I think!  Remember that only a small
> fraction (< 10%) of paragraphs in HEAD's release notes have this
> property, so I don't think that things will be really cluttered.
> 
> On HEAD:
> 
> tomcat:common% grep '<para' new.sgml | wc
>      380    2598   24637
> tomcat:common% grep '<para arch=' new.sgml | wc
>       27     179    1852
> 
> On RELENG_6_2 (this is just an example of what a more "typical" release
> would look like...I don't intend):
> 
> tomcat:common% grep '<para' new.sgml | wc
>      111     780    7068
> tomcat:common% grep '<para arch=' new.sgml | wc
>        7      50     478
> 
> Maybe I should try to mock this up so we're thinking about the same thing?
> 

Ok, I assume you have a prototype in the works.  When that's out, we can
still decide whether or not this is an issue.  Let's see how it looks :-)

- Christian

-- 
Christian Brueffer	chris at unixpages.org	brueffer at FreeBSD.org
GPG Key:	 http://people.freebsd.org/~brueffer/brueffer.key.asc
GPG Fingerprint: A5C8 2099 19FF AACA F41B  B29B 6C76 178C A0ED 982D
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-doc/attachments/20061122/148383f1/attachment.sig>