Manual: Use own build tool package for building the manual

patch file to switch to the own build package

Logged In: YES
user_id=431345
Originator: NO

Builds fine for me!

Thanks,
Denis

Logged In: YES
user_id=631874
Originator: NO

Yes, looks good.

However I'm not sure if we want to include help compiler in the zip. It is part of Platform/Windows SDK already. And we require Platform/Windows SDK for building WinMerge. So every developer should already have it.

Then, MSDN says MS is not planning adding new features to HHC so there probably won't be new versions of it.

Send Christian a mail asking to add new download category for this. I could do it too, but better that admins do it. :)

And, this is NOT for 2.8 branch, only for trunk and 2.10 branch.

Logged In: YES
user_id=431345
Originator: NO

You might want to clean up the DTD while you're at it. The eDE package contains the docbook 4.3 dtd, which is a bit out of date. However, WinMerge_help.xml doesn't really use this local copy, it uses the canonical invocation:

<!DOCTYPE book PUBLIC "-//OASIS//DTD DocBook XML V4.2//EN"
"http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/xml/4.2/docbookx.dtd"

First, if we're no longer using eDE, can you update the declaration to Docbook 4.5? That's the current standard version.

Second, if it's not your intention to require network access for the build, consider adding the DTD to the recommended build package - it's very small. Then you could change the declaration in WinMerge_Help.xml to something like

<!DOCTYPE book PUBLIC "-//OASIS//DTD DocBook XML V4.3//EN"
"./build/dtd/docbookx.dtd"

Denis

Logged In: YES
user_id=431345
Originator: NO

Sorry, I mistyped the suggested declaration. Should have been

<!DOCTYPE book PUBLIC "-//OASIS//DTD DocBook XML V4.5//EN"
"./build/dtd/docbookx.dtd"

Logged In: YES
user_id=652377
Originator: YES

> However I'm not sure if we want to include help compiler in the zip.

Ok, developers have maybe the Platform/Windows SDK, but what is with none-developers that want to help with the manual? For this people it would easier, if we include the help compiler in the package. And I am not sure, if the hhc.exe path on all platforms are the same!?

> Send Christian a mail asking to add new download category for this.

Just done! :)

> can you update the declaration to Docbook 4.5?

I think that should be no problem!

> consider adding the DTD to the recommended build package

No problem, I will update the package! Thanks for the hints!

Logged In: YES
user_id=652377
Originator: YES

Ok, I updated the package archives. They now include the DTD files too:

http://winmerge.org/~gerundt/winmerge_manual_build_tools_v1.7z (2.37 MB)
http://winmerge.org/~gerundt/winmerge_manual_build_tools_v1.zip (2.99 MB)

And the new patch switch to this local DocBook DTD.

Greetings,
Tim

Btw: Should we remove "Manual-html.dsl" and "build\build.sh" with this patch? There was only needed for building the manual with SF.net, but nobody do it anymore.
File Added: winmerge_manual_build_tools_v2.patch

patch file v2:

Logged In: YES
user_id=631874
Originator: NO

Ok, hhc is small. Lets include it.

> Btw: Should we remove "Manual-html.dsl" and "build\build.sh"
We can remove them, but in separate patch. So if somebody wants to try DSSSL he doesn't need to revert unrelated changes.

Logged In: YES
user_id=631874
Originator: NO

Please commit this patch (and update documentation) to trunk. Even if the zip isn't yet available from sf.net downloads few downloads from web site are ok.

But lets get this into 2.10 trunk only after some testing in trunk.

Logged In: YES
user_id=631874
Originator: NO

..of course I meant 2.10 branch...

patch for the readme file

Logged In: YES
user_id=652377
Originator: YES

File Added: readme-manual.patch

Logged In: YES
user_id=652377
Originator: YES

Committed to SVN (Trunk, In Revision 5614).

Logged In: YES
user_id=631874
Originator: NO

Minor thing.. Maybe use http://www.java.com/getjava/ as Java download link?

Logged In: YES
user_id=652377
Originator: YES

> Maybe use http://www.java.com/getjava/ as Java download link?

Sounds good! Committed to SVN (Trunk, In Revision 5615).

Logged In: YES
user_id=431345
Originator: NO

Very nice, these changes improve the doc infrastructure a lot, imho. It also resolves my Feature Request #2001804. (Support xinclude, update doc build infrastructure). Let me know if I should resolve that FR somehow - I assume you prefer to do it.

Logged In: YES
user_id=609728
Originator: NO

I added a new "Developer tools" category to the download section. So you can go ahead and make it available for download.

Logged In: YES
user_id=631874
Originator: NO

How we should name the releases in that developer tools? That mess called download page can only have "releases" which contain one or more files. So basically we can add every version of tool as new release with version number (Manual Build V1, Some Other Tool V1.0, Manual Build V2). But the funny thing is the page shows only couple of latest releases in one category. So if we release three versions of some tool, other tools aren't visible in first page anymore. And one very important point is if we decide 2.10.x works with Manual Tools V1 we must have that version visible as long as the 2.10.x releases.

Ok, maybe we just should add direct links to the releases in the documentation... And we can expect developers to have patience to go through that list of releases...

Logged In: YES
user_id=652377
Originator: YES

I think the developer tools will don't change often, so version numbers like v1.0, v1.1 and v2.0 should be enough. And putting the WinMerge version to the tools would be to much work ("Manual Build for WinMerge 2.8").

Since the tools not often change, we could directly link to the release page from the documentation. For example: "you need _our manual build tools package v1.x_ to build the manual"

So only masochists need to surf through the list of releases! ;-)

Logged In: YES
user_id=631874
Originator: NO

I'm thinking about the case there will be other tools too, not just manual build tools.

I added the tools as "Manual Tools V1.0". Now available from downloads. So you can fix the doc and commit to 2.10 branch too.

Logged In: YES
user_id=652377
Originator: YES

Ok, I fixed the doc in Trunk (In Revision 5631) and committed the changes to the 2.10 branch (In Revision 5632).