On 30/05/12 17:45, The Fungi wrote:
> On 2012-05-30 17:35:14 +0100 (+0100), Dmitrijs Ledkovs wrote:
>> Isn't it possible to extract those from snapshot.debian.org
>> per-release/per-time ?
>
> Sure, or archive.d.o, but at my day job a lot of the admins I work
> with would be hard-pressed to be able to retrieve and extract the
> docs from an arbitrary DEB without a lot of instruction... they're
> just fine with using Web browsers though since that's how they get
> to "the Google" already.
>
> It sounds like Ubuntu already have a good solution at manpages.u.c,
> and have worked through a lot of the tougher issues (like
> internalionalized indexing, which I hadn't even thought about).
>


What I said was a comment w.r.t. bsd's manpages are core to their system.

As in, since we have snapshot.debian.org can we not use that platform to
extract and serve useful stuff over http directly / easily viewable,
e.g. manpages using ubuntu's or some other code. And/or possibly change
logs / news files, etc.

As in, snapshot.debian.org is just as central to debian infrastructure
as things bsd has in place.
--
Regards,
Dmitrijs.

On 30.05.2012 18:32, Andrew Starr-Bochicchio wrote:
> Dustin Kirkland maintains something similar for Ubuntu:
> manpages.ubuntu.com The code he uses to generate it is available at
> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu-manpage-repository

And thanks to jfs we have manpages.debian.net, providing the same for
Debian. Including support for multiple distributions starting with Lenny.


--
with kind regards,
Arno Töll
IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC
GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D

On Mi, 30 mai 12, 19:03:06, Arno Töll wrote:
> On 30.05.2012 18:32, Andrew Starr-Bochicchio wrote:
> > Dustin Kirkland maintains something similar for Ubuntu:
> > manpages.ubuntu.com The code he uses to generate it is available at
> > https://launchpad.net/ubuntu-manpage-repository
>
> And thanks to jfs we have manpages.debian.net, providing the same for
> Debian. Including support for multiple distributions starting with Lenny.

Is there any reason for that service to not be hosted on debian.org?

Kind regards,
Andrei
--
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic

On Wed, 30 May 2012 13:20:24 +0100
Philip Ashmore <contact@philipashmore.com> wrote:

> On 30/05/12 12:29, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
> > On 05/26/2012 09:09 PM, Philip Ashmore wrote:
> >> On 05/26/2012 06:53 AM, Jonathan Callen wrote:
> >>> On 05/25/2012 10:03 PM, Philip Ashmore wrote:
> >>>> Hi there.
> >>>>
> >>>> First, here's what I'm talking about -
> >>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permalink
> >>>> Unfortunately Wikipedia doesn't offer permalinks itself, so
> >>>> hopefully the above link won't "rot".
> >>>
> >>> And here's the permalink to the above article, as it was when the
> >>> preceding post was made:
> >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Permalink&oldid=483438630
> >>> Or, if you prefer links that don't indicate where they're really
> >>> going: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=483438630
> >>
> >> I'm happy and sad with this.
> >> Happy that Wikipedia provides permalink support.
> >> Sad that it didn't document it in its article about permalinks.
> >>
> >> Is there documentation on this feature somewhere?
> >>
> >> Permalinks, along with the fact that MediaWiki is free GPLv2,
> >> makes a compelling argument for moving Debian documentation to
> >> MediaWiki.
> >
> > Which documentation are you talking about? Most official
> > documentation should have a fixed URL.
> >
> > If you are talking about the wiki: retrieving a fixed version from
> > moinmoin is the same as in mediawiki.
> >
> > So I can't see a useful argument here, only FUD trying to talk
> > people into using Mediawiki.
> >
> Hi there and thanks for your feedback.
>
> I'm talking about the fact that Debian has mail archives that may
> include links to documentation that has changed since the mail was
> written, possibly rendering the mail thread misleading or nonsensical.
>
> Any documentation system that can provide a means to refer to a
> specific version (permalinks) would be better than what's there now.

Could you give examples of things lacking permalinks?
thanks,
kk

--
Karl Goetz, (Kamping_Kaiser / VK7FOSS)
http://www.kgoetz.id.au
No, I won't join your social networking group
*** I've changed GPG key to 6C097260 ***

Le Sat, May 26, 2012 at 03:03:06AM +0100, Philip Ashmore a écrit :
>
> What I noticed by its absence was that no-one linked to official Debian
> policy detailing the choices made and their justification.
>
> Then it struck me that if such a document existed, it would be subject to
> change as Debian policy itself evolved, making any old links nonsensical or
> misleading.

Dear Philip,

we publish the Debian Policy with the following procedure, that
does not allow permalinks.

1) The Policy is developed as a native Debian package.

2) Updates of the Policy are published by uploading new
versions of the package.

3) www.debian.org extracts the HTML build of the policy from
the latest debian-policy pakcage, and places it under
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/

This helps the Policy team and the WWW team to work without having to learn
each other's build systems, but this means that new versions override old ones.

If you have a concrete proposition for a procedure that is as convenient, but
allows to keep old versions somewhere, you can propose it on
debian-www@lists.debian.org, but please consider that there can be legitimate
objections to your proposition, and that unless you have time to work on
implementation and maintainance by yourself, your proposition will need to be
exciting enough to decide other volunteers to work on.

Cheers,

--
Charles Plessy
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20120530223458.GA19506@falafel.plessy.net">http://lists.debian.org/20120530223458.GA19506@falafel.plessy.net

On 30/05/12 22:42, Karl Goetz wrote:

On Wed, 30 May 2012 13:20:24 +0100
Philip Ashmore<contact@philipashmore.com> wrote:


On 30/05/12 12:29, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:

On 05/26/2012 09:09 PM, Philip Ashmore wrote:

On 05/26/2012 06:53 AM, Jonathan Callen wrote:

On 05/25/2012 10:03 PM, Philip Ashmore wrote:

Hi there.

First, here's what I'm talking about -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permalink
Unfortunately Wikipedia doesn't offer permalinks itself, so
hopefully the above link won't "rot".


And here's the permalink to the above article, as it was when the
preceding post was made:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Permalink&oldid=483438630
Or, if you prefer links that don't indicate where they're really
going: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=483438630


I'm happy and sad with this.
Happy that Wikipedia provides permalink support.
Sad that it didn't document it in its article about permalinks.

Is there documentation on this feature somewhere?

Permalinks, along with the fact that MediaWiki is free GPLv2,
makes a compelling argument for moving Debian documentation to
MediaWiki.


Which documentation are you talking about? Most official
documentation should have a fixed URL.

If you are talking about the wiki: retrieving a fixed version from
moinmoin is the same as in mediawiki.

So I can't see a useful argument here, only FUD trying to talk
people into using Mediawiki.


Hi there and thanks for your feedback.

I'm talking about the fact that Debian has mail archives that may
include links to documentation that has changed since the mail was
written, possibly rendering the mail thread misleading or nonsensical.

Any documentation system that can provide a means to refer to a
specific version (permalinks) would be better than what's there now.


Could you give examples of things lacking permalinks?
thanks,
kk


http://www.debian.org/

Philip


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4FC6A645.7010402@philipashmore.com">http://lists.debian.org/4FC6A645.7010402@philipashmore.com

[CCing debian-www as requested but I'm not subscribed]

Le 31/05/2012 00:34, Charles Plessy a écrit :
> Le Sat, May 26, 2012 at 03:03:06AM +0100, Philip Ashmore a écrit :
>>
>> What I noticed by its absence was that no-one linked to official Debian
>> policy detailing the choices made and their justification.
>>
>> Then it struck me that if such a document existed, it would be subject to
>> change as Debian policy itself evolved, making any old links nonsensical or
>> misleading.

I also think it would be a great thing.

> Dear Philip,
>
> we publish the Debian Policy with the following procedure, that
> does not allow permalinks.
>
> 1) The Policy is developed as a native Debian package.
>
> 2) Updates of the Policy are published by uploading new
> versions of the package.
>
> 3) www.debian.org extracts the HTML build of the policy from
> the latest debian-policy pakcage, and places it under
> http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/
>
> This helps the Policy team and the WWW team to work without having to learn
> each other's build systems, but this means that new versions override old ones.
>
> If you have a concrete proposition for a procedure that is as convenient, but
> allows to keep old versions somewhere, you can propose it on
> debian-www@lists.debian.org,

What about a layout similar to this one :
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/@package_version@/[doc extracted]
with the following symlinks in http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy:
"last" or "current" -> `last-version-extracted`
X.Y.Z -> last X.Y.Z.T (so that policy are reachable without the minor revision)
"squeeze" -> `version included in squeeze`

We can also have links for stable/testing/... and/or for
number of debian release (release-6.0 -> ...)

And anything that does not match the first level is redirected :
debian-policy/(.*)$ -> debian-policy/last/$1
with a 304 HTTP redirect so that current links keep the same actual meaning

This would allow to target a specific version of the policy in links.

Regards,
Vincent

> but please consider that there can be legitimate
> objections to your proposition, and that unless you have time to work on
> implementation and maintainance by yourself, your proposition will need to be
> exciting enough to decide other volunteers to work on.
>
> Cheers,
>

--
Vincent Danjean GPG key ID 0x9D025E87 vdanjean@debian.org
GPG key fingerprint: FC95 08A6 854D DB48 4B9A 8A94 0BF7 7867 9D02 5E87
Unofficial pkgs: http://moais.imag.fr/membres/vincent.danjean/deb.html
APT repo: deb http://people.debian.org/~vdanjean/debian unstable main


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4FC7181F.3090800@free.fr">http://lists.debian.org/4FC7181F.3090800@free.fr