1 |
2008/4/28 Sven Vermeulen <swift@g.o>: |
2 |
> On 4/27/08, Josh Saddler <nightmorph@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
> > I, personally, hate the whole business of copying stuff to draft/ and then |
4 |
> > back again. It's a pain, and there's some risk of forgetting stuff or not |
5 |
> > getting it moved or forgetting to delete old files (this happened once or |
6 |
> > twice with this release). That's why I dispensed with doing draft/2008.0/ |
7 |
> > and just went straight to the toplevel dir. |
8 |
> [...] |
9 |
> |
10 |
> > As I see it, we have a few options: |
11 |
> > |
12 |
> > 1. Keep the "draft" disclaimer for the beta handbooks, the only live |
13 |
> > versions available. |
14 |
> > 2. Add listings for "beta" in addition to "latest stable" (really old) in |
15 |
> > our index, and link to them. |
16 |
> > 3. Add disclaimer to TOC for beta status. Replaces(?) draft disclaimer. |
17 |
> > 4. Ditch the draft disclaimer, and instead just consider each handbook a |
18 |
> > "release" handbook. We just use the beta stage/file/mirror names. Since the |
19 |
> > only thing that's in testing is the CDs, really. |
20 |
> > |
21 |
> > I'm all for 1, 3, or 4. My personal favorite is 4. Thoughts? |
22 |
> |
23 |
> Mine is 4 as well. The "2008_beta" handbook for GDP is a "production" |
24 |
> handbook - the release is publically available and all the disclaimers |
25 |
> for the _beta release should automatically apply to its documentation |
26 |
> as well. |
27 |
|
28 |
Yeah. #4 is the best option. |
29 |
-- |
30 |
gentoo-doc@l.g.o mailing list |