Alternative plan for DDP - Debian

This is a discussion on Alternative plan for DDP - Debian ; Hi, Let me propose following alternative plan. Basics: cvs.debian.org: debian-doc/ddp/ This will contain Makefiles and scripts used to create web pages. No SGML/XML will be there. DD only has access. alioth.debian.org ddp/ddp/ This will have full source including Makefiles and ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24

Thread: Alternative plan for DDP

  1. Alternative plan for DDP

    Hi,

    Let me propose following alternative plan.

    Basics:
    cvs.debian.org: debian-doc/ddp/
    This will contain Makefiles and scripts used to create web pages.
    No SGML/XML will be there.
    DD only has access.

    alioth.debian.org ddp/ddp/
    This will have full source including Makefiles and scripts.
    Minor reorganization of directory names.(*)

    joy's (I think) cron script to check out CVS
    Step 1: checkout from alioth.debian.org (source1)
    Step 2: export from cvs.debian.org (source2)
    Step 3: copy source2 over source1 with cp -af
    Build like he does now using Makefile in parent directory.

    Merit:
    Having full source in alioth.debian.org enable anyone to build source
    with minimum efforts. Also good contributor and DD can use CVS as
    sandbag to polish build script cooperatively.

    Demerit:
    Someone has to copy updated script once in a while between trees.
    (I use diff & mc for that. So not much typing.)
    CVS checkout script needs adjustment.
    (This is given needs anyway for security.)

    Way to ask admin:
    I think we need to make completed tar ball ready to be untared.

    Directory name:

    I think this is a good time to change directory name to match with the
    web page name and s/manuals.sgml/manuals/.

    I mean directory name matches with name listed in javi's list.
    (Javi's list is duplicated in ddp.alioth.debian.org page)
    Remove totally useless directories.

    Question:
    What to do marginal web pages which was not listed in javi's list.

    Osamu


    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFAIBat6A/EwagGHzIRAvzzAJ4tCN2ZJTfoVE+Verm4DlnUUPng1gCfSctT
    G/7ICY3kokDAb58GoIkGpjg=
    =/Bia
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  2. Re: Alternative plan for DDP

    On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 10:46:21PM +0100, Osamu Aoki wrote:
    [...]
    > joy's (I think) cron script to check out CVS
    > Step 1: checkout from alioth.debian.org (source1)
    > Step 2: export from cvs.debian.org (source2)
    > Step 3: copy source2 over source1 with cp -af
    > Build like he does now using Makefile in parent directory.


    Makefiles could also support VPATH to find source files, then
    gluck has 2 distinct checkouts, there is no need to merge them.

    > I think this is a good time to change directory name to match with the
    > web page name and s/manuals.sgml/manuals/.

    [...]

    Your proposal looks fine.
    We can first work on maintained documents and see what to do with others
    later.

    Denis


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  3. Re: Alternative plan for DDP

    On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 11:28:01PM +0100, Denis Barbier wrote:
    > On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 10:46:21PM +0100, Osamu Aoki wrote:
    > [...]
    > > joy's (I think) cron script to check out CVS
    > > Step 1: checkout from alioth.debian.org (source1)
    > > Step 2: export from cvs.debian.org (source2)
    > > Step 3: copy source2 over source1 with cp -af
    > > Build like he does now using Makefile in parent directory.

    >
    > Makefiles could also support VPATH to find source files, then
    > gluck has 2 distinct checkouts, there is no need to merge them.


    If it is Makefile only, you have point. I have many supplimental build
    scripts including hacked debiandocsgml2* to build Chinese PDF/PS files
    and other things. Does VPATH address all of them? If not, stick with
    crude but simple method.

    > > I think this is a good time to change directory name to match with the
    > > web page name and s/manuals.sgml/manuals/.

    > [...]
    >
    > Your proposal looks fine.
    > We can first work on maintained documents and see what to do with others
    > later.


    FYI: I have created CVS for alioth with updated filenames etc.

    THIS IS TEST ONLY.

    I am travelling next few days.

    So please do not comit to CVS under /cvsroot/ddp/ddp/*

    You can play with it by checking out.

    Manual page will not be affected.

    Also check http://ddp.alioth.debian.org for the summary of situation.

    When I come back, I will check mails and do a fair fixing if needed.

    /cvsroot/ddp/ddp/Makefile will not work as is since I changed file
    names.

    Good night.

    Osamu


    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFAIDmf6A/EwagGHzIRAkx3AJ0RmrgvNh9Nd2ttU5pxASjA8vlaSACfYYE9
    GiEDy9r6zRybOoZlF+nrngs=
    =E0GQ
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  4. Re: Alternative plan for DDP

    On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 10:46:21PM +0100, Osamu Aoki wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    > Let me propose following alternative plan.


    As far as I see it it's not really an "alternative" plan, that's just step
    4 of the plan I proposed fully detailed. I don't think we should skip steps
    1-3 and

    a) not forewarn authors and translators
    b) not maintain website updates while we implement the technical details
    c) not wait until what debian-admins have to say regarding this website
    update proposal, which drastically changes the way website is updated and
    has an impact beyond just the DDP.

    I might be overly cautious here, and I do know this discussion should
    have taken place two months ago. But I sincerely prefer to err on the side
    of caution than to have people wondering what's going on.

    Notice that if someone casually browses Alioth's CVS he will now see:
    http://cvs.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin...p/?cvsroot=ddp
    where not even a README file says that CVS should _not_ be used!

    I'm adding a news item now telling people that's just up for testing, but
    it should not have been done in the first place.



    Javi

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFAIMCWsandgtyBSwkRAkcYAJ9qFD/IJzuY+qW3/8kjLOo800wTXgCdExLP
    302ia20VMnf+tZMKAl12FN0=
    =QiVt
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  5. Re: Alternative plan for DDP

    On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 10:46:21PM +0100, Osamu Aoki wrote:
    > joy's (I think) cron script to check out CVS
    > Step 1: checkout from alioth.debian.org (source1)
    > Step 2: export from cvs.debian.org (source2)
    > Step 3: copy source2 over source1 with cp -af
    > Build like he does now using Makefile in parent directory.
    >


    Important hint: every script/makefile must use '-f Makefile' explicitly in
    make invocation to avoid the default name overriding by malicious
    use of GNUmakefile. That's mandatory IMHO. Setting of MAKEFILES could
    also be considered to avoid this kind of potential abuse.

    The point is not considering alioth cvs more trustable than needed.
    That's also my concern about having scripts cvs mantained on alioth,
    of course.

    --
    Francesco P. Lovergine


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  6. Re: Alternative plan for DDP

    On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 10:51:19AM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
    > On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 10:46:21PM +0100, Osamu Aoki wrote:
    > > Hi,
    > >
    > > Let me propose following alternative plan.

    >
    > As far as I see it it's not really an "alternative" plan, that's just step
    > 4 of the plan I proposed fully detailed. I don't think we should skip steps
    > 1-3 and
    >
    > a) not forewarn authors and translators
    > b) not maintain website updates while we implement the technical details
    > c) not wait until what debian-admins have to say regarding this website
    > update proposal, which drastically changes the way website is updated and
    > has an impact beyond just the DDP.
    >


    I partially agree. Please, we should wait a word from d-admin as first step.
    People with ssh access to cvs should be currently
    sufficiently warned about. We waited two months, a few days of dalay are
    not a so big problem. I cannot see a real reason to have the old cvs
    working instead. Anyone with a ssh access can get a snapshot in any
    moment, and other contributors should anyway avoid committing.
    They also could wait a few days for transition.

    > I might be overly cautious here, and I do know this discussion should
    > have taken place two months ago. But I sincerely prefer to err on the side
    > of caution than to have people wondering what's going on.
    >


    I agree.

    > Notice that if someone casually browses Alioth's CVS he will now see:
    > http://cvs.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin...p/?cvsroot=ddp
    > where not even a README file says that CVS should _not_ be used!
    >
    > I'm adding a news item now telling people that's just up for testing, but
    > it should not have been done in the first place.
    >


    Well done. The project home page should be more clear about
    the transition status. Something like '

    stay tuned, but please do not
    commit cvs changes on alioth or cvs.d.o even if possible, wihout asking
    on debian-doc

    ' could be ideal.

    There is also a News section for that.

    --
    Francesco P. Lovergine


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  7. Re: Alternative plan for DDP

    On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 11:57:02AM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
    > >
    > > I'm adding a news item now telling people that's just up for testing, but
    > > it should not have been done in the first place.
    > >

    >
    > Well done. The project home page should be more clear about
    > the transition status. Something like '

    stay tuned, but please do not
    > commit cvs changes on alioth or cvs.d.o even if possible, wihout asking
    > on debian-doc

    ' could be ideal.


    The home page already says so, albeit not very strongly.

    >
    > There is also a News section for that.


    That's where I added it. I did not change the web page since, from my
    experience at sourceforge/savannah usually more people read the _project_
    page than the _home_ page.

    Regards

    Javi

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFAIPtZsandgtyBSwkRAiuLAJ4qzyEZIh10ALbao3tapO ltYx0dGgCZATZi
    hz9hos94o0WzpH8lktVcu28=
    =HJtx
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  8. maint-guide et other lost children

    Comments about some questionable docs:

    maint-guide
    -----------

    That's the New Maintainer's Guide. It's a good starting point to
    the art of packaging for debian, written by joy.
    It should be listed among other valid guides, It needs a few updates,
    but it's basically good. There is also a package in sid for that.

    release-notes
    -------------

    That's obvious. And obviuolsy to be updated for next release
    and maintained.


    es/fr sections
    ---------------

    we should ask to respective main translators if they are
    yet useful/used.

    --
    Francesco P. Lovergine


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  9. Re: maint-guide et other lost children

    On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 12:47:51PM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
    > Comments about some questionable docs:
    >
    > maint-guide


    Questionable? By whose definition?

    --
    2. That which causes joy or happiness.


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  10. Re: maint-guide et other lost children

    On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 04:41:57PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
    > On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 12:47:51PM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
    > > Comments about some questionable docs:
    > >
    > > maint-guide

    >
    > Questionable? By whose definition?
    >


    Just as defined in the ddp.alioth home page.
    So ask Osamu
    Seriuosly, he probably was asking if any of them should be considered
    obsolete or inactive.

    --
    Francesco P. Lovergine


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  11. Re: maint-guide et other lost children

    On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 12:47:51PM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
    [...]
    > es/fr sections
    > ---------------
    >
    > we should ask to respective main translators if they are
    > yet useful/used.


    fr/debian-fr-howto is maintained, IIRC Nicolas Sabouret was
    preparing a new release just before the compromise.

    Denis


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  12. Re: maint-guide et other lost children

    On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 12:47:51PM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
    >
    > es/fr sections
    > ---------------
    >
    > we should ask to respective main translators if they are
    > yet useful/used.


    Those are _not_ translation. Those directories are placeholder for stuff
    which is written primarily in spanish/french and might never get
    translated. The documents under es/ all hold they might need a little
    update bug they are useful as they are now.

    Regards

    Javi

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFAIWBksandgtyBSwkRAsBjAJ9JudtAbHv7DAi7okOeZz 3Evnd8HwCfe41G
    2rbPR9tqsKkAV+SbzvCtBNo=
    =gQkS
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  13. Re: maint-guide et other lost children

    On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 05:36:33PM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
    > On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 04:41:57PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote:
    > > On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 12:47:51PM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
    > > > Comments about some questionable docs:
    > > >
    > > > maint-guide

    > >
    > > Questionable? By whose definition?
    > >

    >
    > Just as defined in the ddp.alioth home page.
    > So ask Osamu


    Yep.

    > Seriuosly, he probably was asking if any of them should be considered
    > obsolete or inactive.


    This may have been a bad choice of words.

    How can developer-reference and maint-guide be excluded?

    Most of the listed needs to be retained.


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  14. Re: maint-guide et other lost children

    On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 12:47:51PM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
    > maint-guide
    > release-notes
    > es/fr sections


    They all have to stay in DDP. I changed web page statement accordingly.

    Osamu


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  15. Re: Alternative plan for DDP

    On Wed, Feb 04, 2004 at 11:04:34AM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
    > On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 10:46:21PM +0100, Osamu Aoki wrote:
    > > joy's (I think) cron script to check out CVS
    > > Step 1: checkout from alioth.debian.org (source1)
    > > Step 2: export from cvs.debian.org (source2)
    > > Step 3: copy source2 over source1 with cp -af
    > > Build like he does now using Makefile in parent directory.
    > >

    >
    > Important hint: every script/makefile must use '-f Makefile' explicitly in
    > make invocation to avoid the default name overriding by malicious
    > use of GNUmakefile. That's mandatory IMHO. Setting of MAKEFILES could
    > also be considered to avoid this kind of potential abuse.


    Very good reminder. Thanks.

    > The point is not considering alioth cvs more trustable than needed.
    > That's also my concern about having scripts cvs mantained on alioth,
    > of course.


    If you read scripts used to make nice PDF for Chinese, Polish, ... in
    Debian Reference, you see that this was done by non-DD. I can judge
    this will not do nasty thing but building these script was beyond my
    ability and I relyed on Jens (a non-DD) to do this. The only way to
    effectively communicate with him was through CVS. So I insist to have
    all contents in Alioth. Otherwise building these in many language is
    impossible. debiandocsgml2* script is not perfect yet.

    If you took time to check the test CVS at alioth, you can see that I
    tried to rationalize directory name. I think doing this now will be
    easiest time.

    Anyway, my notification to the list was not early enough to give all to
    review my intent. Let me go slower now.

    Osamu


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  16. Re: maint-guide et other lost children

    Osamu Aoki writes:

    > How can developer-reference and maint-guide be excluded?


    Can you explain why you don't consider developers-reference active?

    If it's lack of commits that seems rather hypocritical since I'm not
    even capable of doing them right now!


    --
    ......Adam Di Carlo....adam@debian.org.....


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  17. Re: maint-guide et other lost children

    On Thu, Feb 05, 2004 at 05:18:29PM -0500, Adam Di Carlo wrote:
    > Osamu Aoki writes:
    >
    > > How can developer-reference and maint-guide be excluded?

    >
    > Can you explain why you don't consider developers-reference active?
    >
    > If it's lack of commits that seems rather hypocritical since I'm not
    > even capable of doing them right now!


    I thought they are maintained here as the official upstream. Even if it
    is not updated due to resource limitation, I think this source tree is
    active as long as this is the upstream of key document.

    Dead tree is tree with nothing significant. Some tree has build-able
    SGML files with no real content. I call them dead.

    Or am I wrong for assessing the situation?

    Osamu

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFAIs+S6A/EwagGHzIRAizZAJ99HZR8ONUq7lQ8KSdvRiozF8BmyQCfWfNR
    4RiaN8ZbCVMBq/9fUOXtf58=
    =6ekT
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  18. Re: Alternative plan for DDP

    > > The point is not considering alioth cvs more trustable than needed.
    > > That's also my concern about having scripts cvs mantained on alioth,
    > > of course.

    >
    > If you read scripts used to make nice PDF for Chinese, Polish, ... in
    > Debian Reference, you see that this was done by non-DD. I can judge
    > this will not do nasty thing but building these script was beyond my
    > ability and I relyed on Jens (a non-DD) to do this. The only way to
    > effectively communicate with him was through CVS. So I insist to have
    > all contents in Alioth. Otherwise building these in many language is
    > impossible. debiandocsgml2* script is not perfect yet.
    >


    Ok, but as Javi also said, having 2 CVSes for the same thing (scripts)
    is evil. So we would have all stuff on Alioth and move scripts
    (after auditing by DDs eyes) to gluck when needed.

    Proposal:

    A nice script could be written to checksum scripts and create a signable
    list of trustable scripts on alioth. Then, another script on gluck
    could import only files in that list after proper checking.
    One of the PMs could so sign the list when all its files
    had been checked.
    This could ensure that only coherent and trustable scripts are used
    on gluck, and could avoid error-prone human-based copies.

    --
    Francesco P. Lovergine


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  19. Re: Alternative plan for DDP

    Hi

    Before going further, I have to correct my previous statement:

    webwml : This has entry in alioth, there is nothing in here. So they
    are operating only in cvs.debian.org under gluck.

    On Fri, Feb 06, 2004 at 10:03:41AM +0100, Francesco P. Lovergine wrote:
    > > > The point is not considering alioth cvs more trustable than needed.
    > > > That's also my concern about having scripts cvs mantained on alioth,
    > > > of course.

    > >
    > > If you read scripts used to make nice PDF for Chinese, Polish, ... in
    > > Debian Reference, you see that this was done by non-DD. I can judge
    > > this will not do nasty thing but building these script was beyond my
    > > ability and I relyed on Jens (a non-DD) to do this. The only way to
    > > effectively communicate with him was through CVS. So I insist to have
    > > all contents in Alioth. Otherwise building these in many language is
    > > impossible. debiandocsgml2* script is not perfect yet.
    > >

    >
    > Ok, but as Javi also said, having 2 CVSes for the same thing (scripts)
    > is evil. So we would have all stuff on Alioth and move scripts
    > (after auditing by DDs eyes) to gluck when needed.
    >
    > Proposal:
    >
    > A nice script could be written to checksum scripts and create a
    > signable list of trustable scripts on alioth.


    I thought about this route. But where and what permission to use to
    store them. And where you keep these scripts. If these script are to
    be kept in the CVS archive, this should be a group/project with
    fewer member.

    > Then, another script on gluck could import only files in that list
    > after proper checking. One of the PMs could so sign the list when all
    > its files had been checked. This could ensure that only coherent and
    > trustable scripts are used on gluck, and could avoid error-prone
    > human-based copies.


    If you can make simple and clean script to all these without any
    compication, that will be nice. But until then, 2 CVSROOT is the only
    simple and sure solution. I am open for this fancy scheme if I see the
    working solution.


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  20. Re: Alternative plan for DDP

    On Fri, Feb 06, 2004 at 10:58:03PM +0100, Osamu Aoki wrote:
    > > Proposal:
    > >
    > > A nice script could be written to checksum scripts and create a
    > > signable list of trustable scripts on alioth.

    >
    > I thought about this route. But where and what permission to use to
    > store them. And where you keep these scripts. If these script are to
    > be kept in the CVS archive, this should be a group/project with
    > fewer member.
    >


    Ownership of the list is not essential. Proper signing is a requirement to
    consider the list trustable. And the two scripts will be subject
    to changes rarely.

    > > Then, another script on gluck could import only files in that list
    > > after proper checking. One of the PMs could so sign the list when all
    > > its files had been checked. This could ensure that only coherent and
    > > trustable scripts are used on gluck, and could avoid error-prone
    > > human-based copies.

    >
    > If you can make simple and clean script to all these without any
    > compication, that will be nice. But until then, 2 CVSROOT is the only
    > simple and sure solution. I am open for this fancy scheme if I see the
    > working solution.
    >


    I'll see what I can do about that.

    --
    Francesco P. Lovergine


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-doc-request@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast