Hi
Dne Wed, 19 Aug 2009 22:00:33 +0200
Christian Perrier napsal(a):
> Maybe the requirement for man pages to be localized and up-to-date
> should be restricted to Debian-specific packages?
>
> Otherwise, I expect many headaches with various upstreams wrt these
> localized manpages.
Well I can
Quoting Raphael Hertzog (hert...@debian.org):
> As far as Debian is concerned, we should simply use po4a on all our
> own manual pages like dpkg is doing.
Maybe the requirement for man pages to be localized and up-to-date
should be restricted to Debian-specific packages?
Otherwise, I expect man
On Wed, 19 Aug 2009, Ben Finney wrote:
> > I agree. While Ben's suggestion sounds nice in theory, it's bound to
> > be a recommendation that will not be acted upon because we have many
> > more interesting challenges to tackle.
>
> The challenge brought up earlier in this thread, that of determini
Raphael Hertzog writes:
> On Tue, 18 Aug 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Given our limited success in getting people to provide man pages for
> > every binary to start with, I'm reluctant to ask package maintainers
> > to patch upstream man pages to do relatively inconsequential things
> > like add
On Tue, 18 Aug 2009, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Ben Finney writes:
>
> > I guess the question then becomes: since Policy describes supposed best
> > practice for Debian, *should* we be more specific about the format of a
> > man page? I think the conventions described in ‘man-pages(7)’ are a good
> >
Ben Finney writes:
> I guess the question then becomes: since Policy describes supposed best
> practice for Debian, *should* we be more specific about the format of a
> man page? I think the conventions described in ‘man-pages(7)’ are a good
> basis for recommendations for all Debian man pages.
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 08:13:20PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> Roger Leigh writes:
>
> > I, for example, use the date format '+%d %b %Y' (01 Aug 2009). The
> > manual pages are human readable documentation. I think that nicely
> > readable dates should be preferred here.
>
> This seems to falsely
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 12:21:38PM +0100, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
>>>
>>
>> It's only unambiguous if you know the convention being adopted /is/
>> ISO-8601. In an ideal world, we could have a standardised date format
>> which the man program can transform into the date representation of
>> the u
It's only unambiguous if you know the convention being adopted /is/
ISO-8601. In an ideal world, we could have a standardised date format
which the man program can transform into the date representation of
the user's locale thus satisfying all requirements.
???
Thats what ISO-8601 is. There
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 08:13:20PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> Roger Leigh writes:
>
> > On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 01:01:34PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote:
> > > I assume we expect man pages to conform to the conventions in
> > > ‘man-pages(7)’.
>
> (I've now been disabused of that assumption.)
>
> > I
10 matches
Mail list logo
