<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2009/7/28 Charles Lepple <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:clepple@gmail.com">clepple@gmail.com</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">On Jul 28, 2009, at 7:53 AM, Arnaud Quette wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
some testing around the NUT Packager Guide to validate the general approach of the new documentation.<br>
The shell script is there to track the command line used to generate the HTML output, and the generated HTML file to show the result.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Hi Arnaud,<br>
<br>
would it be OK for me to merge the contents of the shell script into docs/Makefile.am?<br>
<br>
I plan to make the extra Buildbot step copy the generated documentation to someplace web-accessible.<br><font color="#888888">
</font></blockquote><div><br>though this is the aim (very) soon, ATM I prefer to keep the simple shell script for testing quickly and avoiding to call automake. <br></div></div><br>btw, for the User and Developer Guides (not applicable to the Packager one), I'm thinking about using the combined document approach (eg having a developer.txt that simply includes 1 file per chapters). the drawback of this is that we can have a header in this file. but we can have this header as a comment and put all authors in the main file. I've not validated this, but we might have to use the .xml file to declare multiple authors...<br>
comments and thought on your side?<br><br>Arnaud<br>