Re: Please comment on Online XEmacs Manuals

APA> OK, Martin felt that way too when I asked this a while back. APA> For our users I would bet that latest stable would be more APA> useful. FWIW, I tend to disagree. In particular this serves the people _considering_ gamma very badly, no online docs for the new features (widgets, netinstaller, etc). [NB, this presumes only one set of manuals. There is no problem if we have stable and beta.] Stephen> in places more accurately than the gamma manuals do. Stephen> They are also relatively likely to contain improvements Stephen> in explanations and stuff. APA> How about currently stable and beta, then? I think that's probably sufficient. If we start feeling the need for gamma docs, that means gamma has gone for much too long. APA> I though of physically storing manuals under APA> Documentation/{21.1,21.4,21.5} and switching around symlinks APA> to them. This works well for stable -> 21.1 gamma -> 21.4. Now promote 21.4: stable -> 21.4 gamma -> there_currently_is_no_gamma_branch.html And people who have stale 21.1 URLs can still access it unless we remove the docs for diskspace reasons. But if we have beta -> 21.5 And we release a gamma, say 22.0, we now want gamma -> 22.0 beta -> 22.1 We must clone the tree at this point, because gamma and beta will now diverge (rapidly, we hope :-). Note that either the 21.5 URL dangles, or we _further_ clone a 21.5 branch for historical purposes. We might actually like to do 21.5 -> 21.5_has_forked_into_22.0_gamma_and_22.1_beta.html. True, all of the physical manipulations are basically the same. However using 21.5 -> beta is better IMO because it emphasizes the continuity of the trunk and is conceptually cleaner. Note that we don't know what a user means when he asks for "21.5" at this point in time. He might mean "I've upgraded to gamma, give me 22.0" or he might mean "I'm on the bleeding edge, 22.1". -- Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN Don't ask how you can "do" free software business; ask what your business can "do for" free software.