Subject: Linux-Activists - DOC Channel digest. 93-2-3-21:17
From: "Linux Activists" <[email-masked]>
To: "Linux-Activists" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1993 02:03:05 +0200

Topics:
	 Man pages

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Matt Welsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Man pages
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1993 21:22:02 +0200

Larry Greenfield says:
> >From my perspective, putting the pages all the over on nic is a bad idea,
> but I don't know who will be acessing these the most.  But more to the
> point, the idea of an exploded man-tree is probably more useful than
> tar.z's, since people might only want what changed. Being able to:
> 
> cd /linux/doc/man/man2
> 
> would be easier and more efficent. It also lets people see at a glance what
> has and hasn't been written. 

I think for development of man pages this is a good idea. I.e. the
ALPHA/man directory (whereever it ends up) should be exploded. But should
we really distribute man pages individually? This makes it tougher for
folks to download them in a set. The individual makewhatis INDEX file
in each section's tar file should point out what's in each set, and if
someone only wants to update a certain page they can either ask for it
via e-mail or download the entire relevant section and extract just that
page. I think an exploded tree on the FTP sites would be VERY difficult to
maintain as they're mirrored, keeping track of 8 or 9 .tar.z files is
easier than keeping track of hundereds(?) of roff source files (for the
final distribution, that is). But for alpha man pages an exploded tree, not
mirrored anywhere, is the best bet.

Rik Faith doesn't release all of his binaries seperately, they're packed into 
chunks. 

To hell with it, let's quit talkin' and start writin'. None of these issues are
extremely important. Just let me know what you work out and who ends up 
coordinating the man page project.

mdw

------------------------------

End of DOC Digest
*****************
-------