unstable branch for LFS
gerard at linuxfromscratch.org
Tue Oct 15 13:10:33 PDT 2002
On October 15, 2002 06:15 am, Matthias Benkmann wrote:
I'm about 300 lfs-dev emails behind, so i'll try to catch up asap. This time
it was due to Thanksgiving. Me and my wife decided to go out to the lovely
mountains for a bit. I come back, hords of email.
Okay....unstable book. Yes sounds good, yes I want it, yes long time ago that
probalby nobody but me remembers I once wanted to do it but due to time
constraints we decided not to do it yet. That's not an issue anymore really.
I haven't read all the replies to this thread, but one I did read was that it
might be hard for us the editors to maintain two seperate books. Since if we
make a change to the stable book we should make that same change to the
unstable book to keep them in sync right? That way an unstable book can be
released a stable book later down the road easily since all the stable book
elements are already present. This ideally is done without us making the same
update twice in two directories.
So I propose this: we can use one and the same XML tree to house both the
unstable and stable books. Anybody remember me talking about dynamically
render a customized lfs-book by switching some XML tags that add/remove
certain pages/chunks from the book?
Similarly we can easily add "unstable" XML sections that are only visible when
you enable an entity. If disabled (by default) a normal stable book is
To me that sounds like the easiest solution. But then there's CVS - it'll be a
tad harder to keep track of the changes and revert back to older chagnes as
you have to figure out which commits were updates to stable or unstable
branches. Having a seperate unstable branch has quite a bit of good points
when it comes to revision history and all the likes and will increase our
workload a bit. Just one branch that does it all, but smart usage of XML
techniques, will make it easier for us (editors) but a bit harder for
administrative purposes. Now the latter most people don't care about, except
for the editors themselves. I'll think this through more thoroughly and give
a definite answer soon. In the mean while feel free to come up with your own
ideas how this can work nicely.
-*- If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem -*-
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message
More information about the lfs-dev