Eduardo Tongson wrote:
>>Should we look at a "release cycle", similar to what's happening with the
>>software? i.e. declare a few weeks of typo-fixing, and then move the
>>documentation at that point into a separate copy, associated with that
>>release of DragonFly?
>>
>>This way, documentation matches a particular release. This may become
>>more significant as more radical features get moved in... There's also
>>the bonus of regular cleanups for the docs.
>>
>>
>
> Wow great idea
> I'm with you on this
>
>
Think that through. Sounds good in concept, but how many 'sets' of docs
need to exist? Even if built with 'recycled electrons' instead of 'dead
trees'?
Seems to me better to have the proven FreeBSD method, where you find
notes such as 'prior to 4.X... such '
and '(fixed in 4.YY)' or 'changed in ...'. Along with 'Release Notes',
'changes', 'what's new in X.XX', and 'Errata' lists.
(not to mention security bulletins as well as bugfixes...)
Bill