Re: splitting up docs dir (was Re: Doxygen - another sample, preliminary comments)

[Phil Edwards <pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com>]

On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 04:05:22PM -0800, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
> 
> This email I found quite sane. I agree that duplicating two identical HTML
> docs files are nasty. Could one be read-only (ie, pushed out and unable to
> be modified) and one be read-write?
[...]
> >         b)  occasionally push them to wwwdocs and live with the
> >             inconsistency, or
> 
> I could live with this.

I'll start by removing the files I've listed below from v3/docs, and making
new 'html' and 'doxygen' subdirectories.

Then we need to move the remaining HTML ("inner" technical documentation)
pages/subdirs to the 'html' subdir.  Do we want to preserve history or not?
(Doesn't matter to me.)

Somebody Else should probably handle the * -> html/* move... The
shift to wwwdocs has taught me, among other things, that my
"directory-manipulating-CVS-commands knowledge fu" is weak.


> >     4)  when users ask the hard questions, we would refer them to the
> >         "inner" pages on their local disk, since those are the ones we are
> >         constantly updating (assuming they're using cvs)
> 
> Yuck. Go HTML!

Well, the idea was to refer to "file:///${V3-srcdir}/docs/html/foo.html"
instead of the web server.  The stuff they'd be reading would still be
rendered HTML.

(I suppose they /could/ read them with less(1) if they wanted to... we do
occasionally have some interesting comments in the HTML...)


Phil
P.S.- Someday I'll tell y'all about my good friend Seamus, who wrote all
      his comments (html, c++, etc) in haiku, back in undergrad days.

-- 
pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com  |  pme at sources dot redhat dot com
devphil at several other less interesting addresses in various dot domains
The gods do not protect fools.  Fools are protected by more capable fools.