discuss: Erroneous 'Recent Updates' entry?
Subject:
Re: [discuss] Erroneous 'Recent Updates' entry?
From:
####@####.####
Date:
27 Apr 2006 19:35:31 -0000
Message-Id: <38308.151.196.45.45.1146166530.squirrel@webmail.fergusontechgroup.com>
> ####@####.#### wrote:
> ...
>> Sorry about that. No easy fix I'm afraid. I would need
>> to "freeze" the SGML/XML source (store it elsewhere) to
>> ensure it matches what has actually been published on the
>> site. I'd rather avoid storing multiple copies of the source,
>> since this situation rarely happens.
>
> So if I wanted to help on my end, I could try keeping the
> version number in the CVS copy matching the current tldp
> version no. until I'm ready to submit? That way the version
> listed on the sorted_howtos page would match the tldp version.
Version number AND date, yes.
>> As for automation...Tille, until we strictly enforce
>> some higher-constrained requirements (for publishing)
>> upon every author/document, we will never reach that goal. IMO.
>
> What constraints. SGML/XML formats I'm assuming.
It's more than that actually. The SGML/XML portion is easy.
It's when we get graphics or other ancillary files that either
need to be included (and referenced a certain way), or they
need to go thru some kind of conversion process to be
utilized/referenced within the document. We have a few docs
that require that.
> BTW, if I wanted to finally get around to converting my linuxdoc sgml to a
> docbook format, would I need to request a change in its CVS location? It
> currently recides in a howto/linuxdoc/ which seems like it might cause
> processing issues if I suddenly commit a docbook version overtop of it.
I can handle that part, you just need to inform us what the
situation is when you send a msg to 'submit'. We've had quite
a few documents that have migrated from linuxdoc to docbook.
It's not a problem.
Greg
