Re: Please comment on Online XEmacs Manuals
On 14 Dec 2001, Adrian Aichner wrote:
[]
Do the manuals work for you?
Yes.
Have you noticed any breakage in them?
I just wondering about the strange chapter/section numbering:
XEmacs user's manual:
3.2 Command Line Switches and Arguments
3.3 How XEmacs finds Directories and Files
22.8 Packages
What a jump?
The big questions I can't decide on are these:
How many sets of manuals should we have online?
o stable and gamma and beta
o only beta
o only stable
At this point http://www.xemacs.org/Documentation/beta takes up
ca. 18000KB.
My opinion: For every stable major.minor *and* the latest (unstable) beta
Should we use symbolic names as suggested above?
Should we put them under specific version number directories like
http://www.xemacs.org/Documentation/21.1.14/
to make references to them specific (beta was 21.2 yesterday and is
21.5 today)?
Both, but use symbolic names when making links, that would be easier to
bookmark, and refer to from other HTML documents, but store them in
version directories, that also makes it possible to link to specific
versions.
Should we only use major.minor to increase the manual's lifetime and
just update to latest on that branch from time to time?
e.g. http://www.xemacs.org/Documentation/21.1/
The editor is unchanged (with respect to features) among patch-numbers, so
with that in mind major.minor should be enough for documentation, but then
again bugs are fixed in documentation too from patch-number to
patch-number. But for online it makes no sense to have other than the
latest patch-number available.
Jarl