Re: [gentoo-doc] Improving organization during beta release

[Sven Vermeulen]

On 4/27/08, Josh Saddler <nightmorph@g.o> wrote:
> I, personally, hate the whole business of copying stuff to draft/ and then
> back again. It's a pain, and there's some risk of forgetting stuff or not
> getting it moved or forgetting to delete old files (this happened once or
> twice with this release). That's why I dispensed with doing draft/2008.0/
> and just went straight to the toplevel dir.
[...]
> As I see it, we have a few options:
>
> 1. Keep the "draft" disclaimer for the beta handbooks, the only live
> versions available.
> 2. Add listings for "beta" in addition to "latest stable" (really old) in
> our index, and link to them.
> 3. Add disclaimer to TOC for beta status. Replaces(?) draft disclaimer.
> 4. Ditch the draft disclaimer, and instead just consider each handbook a
> "release" handbook. We just use the beta stage/file/mirror names. Since the
> only thing that's in testing is the CDs, really.
>
> I'm all for 1, 3, or 4. My personal favorite is 4. Thoughts?

Mine is 4 as well. The "2008_beta" handbook for GDP is a "production"
handbook - the release is publically available and all the disclaimers
for the _beta release should automatically apply to its documentation
as well.

If you use 2008_beta, you definitely expect that the handbooks can
contain some minor bugs as well. If you don't want to use the _beta,
you're still free to use the 2007 release media (including docs).
Releng doesn't "support" 2007.0 (i.e. there will not be a 2007 fix) so
afaik, 2007.0 for releng is also unmaintained. Why keep the
documentation officially maintained then?

After all, the (Internet-less) documentation is tied to the release...

Wkr,
  Sven Vermeulen
-- 
gentoo-doc@l.g.o mailing list