httpd-docs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mads Toftum <>
Subject Re: don't distribute docs with source?
Date Wed, 04 Jun 2003 08:16:15 GMT
On Tue, Jun 03, 2003 at 08:25:53PM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> As an advisory, I'd be *really* against separating them out like 1.3.  I've 
> been really aggravated by that separation.  Yes, the 2.x docs and source 
> now have two separate build systems, but I honestly don't think it is a big 
> deal for developers - it enforces that the docs and code represent the 
> 'same' version.

Agreed. But if bandwidth is a major issue, this is one way to use a bit
> As a question, how would we deal with the branches to represent 
> stable/unstable if we have separate source repositories for the doc and 
> source?  By keeping them in the same repository, it's trivial.
Yes, it is doable with a split, but certainly simpler to keep the docs
where they are.

> I'd also say that separating out the docs into language packs doesn't seem 
> right either as there should only be one release tarball.  Having to sign 
> and produce 20 or 30 'releases' (even if some are merely snapshots of the 
> docs) would be confusing to both users and the poor RMs.  -- justin
Yeah, that would be a pain. A less radical approach could be to have the
base version with english only and then an optional language pack containing
all others.
Personally I like what we have now. Being able to read the docs without
a running Apache would be a plus, but that's about the only thing I'd
want to change.


Mads Toftum
`Darn it, who spiked my coffee with water?!' - lwall

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message