root/more/index.html has disappeared, as has all of the content. That isn't acceptable. Even if much of the content is moved elsewhere, index.html has to continue to exist, so that users can continue to find the content. It is OK for some of the links on root/more/index.html to refer to the web site. It is OK to move content out of the release and into the web site if it is unlikely to be referenced in the process of actually using a release. Any of the content that is likely to used by users of a release must be restored. Releases have to be usable without Internet connectivity. Pages like the License information, How to report bugs, and FAQ have to be part of a release. --Beman
On Feb 23, 2008, at 5:46 AM, Beman Dawes wrote:
root/more/index.html has disappeared, as has all of the content. That isn't acceptable.
Even if much of the content is moved elsewhere, index.html has to continue to exist, so that users can continue to find the content. It is OK for some of the links on root/more/index.html to refer to the web site.
It is OK to move content out of the release and into the web site if it is unlikely to be referenced in the process of actually using a release. Any of the content that is likely to used by users of a release must be restored. Releases have to be usable without Internet connectivity.
I agree, but how much content do we actually need in the release? I think we should be minimal, focusing on installation, "Getting Started", library documentation, and "what's new in this release."
Pages like the License information, How to report bugs, and FAQ have to be part of a release.
The license is in LICENSE_1_0.txt. The discussion and justification of the license in more/ don't need to be in a release, because that's the kind of thing you find when you google for the Boost license to see if it's compatible with another license you're using. The FAQ is mostly information for people who either (1) are decided whether or how to get Boost, or (2) thinking of participating in the Boost community in some way. Both of those require an Internet connection anyway, so there's no need to have the FAQ in a release. Same with bug reporting: to report a bug, you need an internet connection, and the first thing you're going to do is go to www.boost.org. So long as the link to the bug tracker is clear on www.boost.org, that's fine. - Doug
Douglas Gregor wrote:
It is OK to move content out of the release and into the web site if it is unlikely to be referenced in the process of actually using a release. Any of the content that is likely to used by users of a release must be restored. Releases have to be usable without Internet connectivity.
I agree, but how much content do we actually need in the release? I think we should be minimal, focusing on installation, "Getting Started", library documentation, and "what's new in this release."
Pages like the License information, How to report bugs, and FAQ have to be part of a release.
The license is in LICENSE_1_0.txt. The discussion and justification of the license in more/ don't need to be in a release, because that's the kind of thing you find when you google for the Boost license to see if it's compatible with another license you're using.
The FAQ is mostly information for people who either (1) are decided whether or how to get Boost, or (2) thinking of participating in the Boost community in some way. Both of those require an Internet connection anyway, so there's no need to have the FAQ in a release.
Not as far as I'm concerned. It irks me no end to be browsing though the release image on my machine and find myself referencing some data on some website. Currently this occurs when I browse the documentation on my local version of the SVN trunk. This is because the html versions of the documentation aren't included - which is OK if they are generated by the installation process or downloaded with the release. I would be curious as to what the plans are in this regard.
Same with bug reporting: to report a bug, you need an internet connection, and the first thing you're going to do is go to www.boost.org. So long as the link to the bug tracker is clear on www.boost.org, that's fine.
Obviously active pages such as bug tracker are going to require internet connectivity. But what's the argument for not making the other release and web pages one thing? Seems easier to me even if it make the release bigger. By making two things, it creates another maintainence task. Robert Ramey
On Feb 23, 2008, at 10:39 AM, Robert Ramey wrote:
Not as far as I'm concerned. It irks me no end to be browsing though the release image on my machine and find myself referencing some data on some website. Currently this occurs when I browse the documentation on my local version of the SVN trunk. This is because the html versions of the documentation aren't included - which is OK if they are generated by the installation process or downloaded with the release. I would be curious as to what the plans are in this regard.
We build all of the HTML and put it into the release tarball, overwriting the HTML files in Subversion that just forward to the web site. It's what we've done ever since we've used BoostBook for some of the libraries.
Obviously active pages such as bug tracker are going to require internet connectivity. But what's the argument for not making the other release and web pages one thing? Seems easier to me even if it make the release bigger. By making two things, it creates another maintainence task.
There may be technical arguments against making release and web pages the same, e.g., because the web pages might make use of CSS that we don't want to ship in the release or, more importantly, PHP that won't be available for most users when browsing locally. So, I think we're looking to minimize redundancy between the web pages and release documentation, and generating both from a single source where that's not the right answer. - Doug
Douglas Gregor wrote:
On Feb 23, 2008, at 5:46 AM, Beman Dawes wrote:
root/more/index.html has disappeared, as has all of the content. That isn't acceptable.
Even if much of the content is moved elsewhere, index.html has to continue to exist, so that users can continue to find the content. It is OK for some of the links on root/more/index.html to refer to the web site.
It is OK to move content out of the release and into the web site if it is unlikely to be referenced in the process of actually using a release. Any of the content that is likely to used by users of a release must be restored. Releases have to be usable without Internet connectivity.
I agree, but how much content do we actually need in the release?
Probably more than half of what's there now isn't required for a release. For example, stuff aimed at Boost developers only need not be part of each release.
I think we should be minimal, focusing on installation, "Getting Started", library documentation, and "what's new in this release."
Pages like the License information, How to report bugs, and FAQ have to be part of a release.
The license is in LICENSE_1_0.txt. The discussion and justification of the license in more/ don't need to be in a release, because that's the kind of thing you find when you google for the Boost license to see if it's compatible with another license you're using.
That's not acceptable in environments with limited connectivity, and inside many large organizations. In both those cases, anything that isn't in the distribution doesn't exist. With limited connectivity the problem is physical, within big organizations the problem is mindset; they don't trust anything that isn't on their own servers. I think the key question is "Is this content needed by users?", and if the answer is yes it should go in the release
The FAQ is mostly information for people who either (1) are decided whether or how to get Boost, or (2) thinking of participating in the Boost community in some way. Both of those require an Internet connection anyway, so there's no need to have the FAQ in a release.
Another group is those considering the use of Boost. Their organization's legal folks have blessed Boost, it has been installed on one of the organization's servers, linked to from internal software engineering web pages, and a few early adopters are reporting good results. So now people on most projects are willing to look at it. They haven't looked at it on the web, because that would be a waste of their time until the prerequisites have been met. In the academic world, and in small companies, people are curious. Programmers look at web sites like Boost looking for ideas. But there is a whole parallel universe where programmers only look at officially blessed stuff on company servers. Sad but true. --Beman
Beman Dawes wrote:
root/more/index.html has disappeared, as has all of the content. That isn't acceptable.
Even if much of the content is moved elsewhere, index.html has to continue to exist, so that users can continue to find the content. It is OK for some of the links on root/more/index.html to refer to the web site.
I'll add back a reworked version of more/index. Some of the links will be broken at first, and we will fix them as we go. --Beman
participants (3)
-
Beman Dawes -
Douglas Gregor -
Robert Ramey