<div dir="auto"><div>Hello Gene,<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"> I read and nodded sometimes and caught myself thinking that I used to propose or agree with some of the points you make, but outgrew those.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">> ...makers claim...</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I suppose this means asciidoc makers (not e.g. UPS makers)? They are actually largely non-Windows, especially in the part about rendering books, presentations, local HTML pages or web sites. These are all platform-independent formats.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">> Holding someone's feet to fire for something</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Who are we to do so? Who are "nut folks"? A loose community joined by an interest, with some persons more prominent in a given year. To require something of UPS makers, the wider community members actually have more legal leverage, as paying customers of this or that company delivering what they can claim a defective product, infringed right-to-repair (spec/protocol docs), etc.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div>Core team and project as an entity has exposure that can be useful for vendors' marketing, and occasionally some things happened due to that. But (sadly), there's no incantation like "Bow thyself to celebrity BDFL, you evil corporation!" and so they would.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">As for civil discourse, anyone can post bugs and raise discussions; maintainers are not special in that regard. (And as said, paying customers can have a slightly upper hand when asking).</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">> Those generated files are not tracked in Git.<br>> But should be.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Actually, no. At least not those with non-deterministic rendering results.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">There are quite a few files rendered and tracked by scripts in NUT recipes, and the massively multiplatform CI does make sure there are no git diffs as result of a build.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Rendered docs have timestamps, renderer versions and whatnot embedded, and are hell to git-track.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">> packaged version in distros</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Their choice. And users'. If they go for stability and a well known landscape that changes slowly (backporting bug fixes to same baseline), or go with daily rolling builds - to each their own, there are pros and cons to both.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">> doc and code versions</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">NUT docs are part of its code base so should closely match. Packages from a code snapshot deliver renders of its docs and should match.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">NUT website since 2.8.0 is rolling with current master, and historic snapshots are issued as part of release rituals to ~never change. So users of packages can go to a site with docs of their version.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Hope this helps,</div><div dir="auto">Jim</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">PS My condolences.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote gmail_quote_container" dir="auto"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, May 13, 2025, 17:45 gene heskett via Nut-upsuser <<a href="mailto:nut-upsuser@alioth-lists.debian.net">nut-upsuser@alioth-lists.debian.net</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On 5/12/25 09:46, Jim Klimov via Nut-upsuser wrote:<br>
Comments from a CET's point of view.<br>
> Hi Sam,<br>
><br>
> Not really sure what you mean here. NUT documentation is written in<br>
> asciidoc, so that it is easy to combine from several source files and<br>
> render into man pages, HTML, PDF, etc. (which does go via docbook XML as a<br>
> technical detail of asciidoc, and does result in some *roff files as a<br>
> technical detail of man page rendering, but in NUT sources/recipes we do<br>
> not directly care about either of those aspects). Allegedly there are a few<br>
> quirks with Asciidoc as well (notably there are several renderers out<br>
> there, but any semblance of a formal standard and common testing suite was<br>
> being discussed as brewing up on FOSDEM 2025), but it is pretty convenient<br>
> and light-weight once you get a hold of it.<br>
But woefully incomplete, primarily because the makers claim one thing in <br>
their docs, but actually deliver something else. I don't consider that <br>
as a nut fault. However, since nut is the only one providing an <br>
industry wide solution in the face of makers who have NDI what the <br>
non-windblows world needs, I do fault the nut folks for not holding the <br>
makers feet a little closer to the fire, stopping the lies and outright <br>
BS this division of our industry is rife with.<br>
> NUT "dist" tarballs, including release snapshots, do include a copy of<br>
> generated man pages (probably in a *roff format) for the benefit of<br>
> end-users who only have a compiler and do not want to burden their systems<br>
> and build times with asciidoc/docbook/etc. tooling. So they can just build<br>
> NUT programs, `make install`, and have them nicely documented out of the<br>
> box. Those generated files are not tracked in Git.<br>
But should be.<br>
> Full-scale builds such as for packaging are encouraged to have the full<br>
> stack in the build agent (or build root) and re-generate these documents.<br>
> This might, depending on local settings, add distro watermarks ("NUT pages<br>
> as part of OS XXX docs"), apply distro-wide build timestamp, use the *roff<br>
> version that OS is comfortable with, or whatever.<br>
><br>
> Also note that since NUT v2.8.3 we added support for `configure` options<br>
> to assign man section codes (numbers or not) for systems that do not follow<br>
> suit of Linux and BSD numbering (e.g. in Solaris/illumos, the system<br>
> commands are historically not "8" but "1m"). Previously this required<br>
> strange patch files on packager side, a burden to be revised/updated for<br>
> each NUT release; now it requires just a few configure options that can be<br>
> left in the recipe once and forever.<br>
<br>
Another point, you are about o make a 2.8.3, but the latest debian is <br>
2.8.0. More feet to hold up to the fire. We can't use either to their <br>
full capability because the docs don't match what we read here. The <br>
docs don't even seem to apply to the version they purport to be, if they <br>
exist at all. Hence I'm pleading for docs that match what the repo <br>
installs.<br>
<br>
I have an APC 1500wa, now several years old. Its front panel display <br>
has been asking for a new set of batteries for at least 5 years, but due <br>
to my now passed wife having COPD, a 20kw kohler in the back yard has an <br>
under 10 second startup time. So this machine runs normally for that <br>
time period. And nut is not running, fails to start since bookworm. And <br>
I have NDI why. The APC OTOH is doing what I bought it for.<br>
<br>
>Hope this clarifies a few points?<br>
<br>
Thanks for reading this far, Jim.<br>
<br>
> Jim Klimov<br>
<br>
Cheers, Gene Heskett, CET.<br>
<br>
-- <br>
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:<br>
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."<br>
-Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940)<br>
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.<br>
- Louis D. Brandeis<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Nut-upsuser mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Nut-upsuser@alioth-lists.debian.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">Nut-upsuser@alioth-lists.debian.net</a><br>
<a href="https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsuser" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsuser</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div></div>