From: Paul V. <pa...@vi...> - 2004-03-06 16:13:01
|
Hi Robert, >> Until now the auto-generated HTML file names look like this: >> bk01ch01.html, bk02ch01s08.html, etc. Very uninformative, but for >> online browsing it's not disastrous. It IS disastrous however when >> the docs are committed - with these names - to the 'web' CVS >> module. > I'm not against the change of names, but either way, the HTML should > not be commited to CVS. The latest version (and possibly the last > stable version) should definately be published on the web, and > probably available to download as a tarball / zip file etc, but if > you put it in the CVS, people will be tempted to edit it there. You're right. I thought we had to commit the HTML version to the CVS web module because the website was autogenerated from that module, but I had it wrong. Yes, there is a script that will place committed stuff on the website, but it's not necessary to do it that way. I can FTP straight to the site. I'm still figuring out one or two things and maybe I'll have to contact Pavel (who's in charge of the website) again, but I expect to put op the docs within a couple of days now. Greetings, Paul Vinkenoog |