Hi,
>>> Mon, 18 Nov 2002 06:28:37 +0900,
>>> Hajimu UMEMOTO <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, 17 Nov 2002 12:35:41 -0500
> Lawrence Greenfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
leg+> We'd like to get IPv6 support into 2.2. Would it be possible for you to
leg+> create your patch against the 2.
>I believe a set of plaintext documentation can be maintained with RCS,
>CVS or SCCS without problems by a distanced dev team, while XSLT will
>require proper usage by the author manuals etc...
Yep. The reality is it's not us who chose the doc tools, but the people
who actually update the doco.
V
Hi,
> On Sun, 17 Nov 2002 12:35:41 -0500
> Lawrence Greenfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
leg+> We'd like to get IPv6 support into 2.2. Would it be possible for you to
leg+> create your patch against the 2.2 branch in CVS?
Oh, it's a great news! Okay, though my patch is against the 2.1
--On Saturday, November 16, 2002 2:10 PM +0900 Hajimu UMEMOTO
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 13 Nov 2002 15:57:57 -0500 (EST)
Rob Siemborski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rjs3> I'm pleased to announce the release of Cyrus IMAPd 2.1.10. This is
mostly rjs3> a bug-fix and cleanup release,
what they used.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Dennis K
Sent: Saturday, November 16, 2002 6:25 PM
To: 'Oleksandr Firsov'
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Cyrus IMAPd 2.1.10 Released
Correct me if I'm wrong, SG
ailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Oleksandr
Firsov
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 9:56 AM
To: Rob Siemborski; Andrew McNamara
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Cyrus IMAPd 2.1.10 Released
Guys/girls What do You talking about?
doc tool, LaTex, etc... That is stone age terms.
I am not familiar
Hi,
> On Wed, 13 Nov 2002 15:57:57 -0500 (EST)
> Rob Siemborski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
rjs3> I'm pleased to announce the release of Cyrus IMAPd 2.1.10. This is mostly
rjs3> a bug-fix and cleanup release, with the notable new feature of Berkeley DB
rjs3> 4.1 support.
My IPv6 patch for
On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, Oleksandr Firsov wrote:
> I am not familiar with product discussed above, but for structured data
> exist de-facto standard which used for such purposes.
For structured documentation, the de-facto standard is the DocBook schema
(there are SGML, and XML incarnations of it).
Se
On Thursday 14 November 2002 14:43 pm, Scott Russell wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 02:35:02PM -0500, Lawrence Greenfield wrote:
> >Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 10:56:07 -0500
> >From: Scott Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > [...]
> >Sooo... any reason why the docs aren't sgml and then built
.
Perfect example is Letter size(USA) versus A4(Europe).
SunS
- Original Message -
From: "Rob Siemborski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Scott Adkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 10:07 AM
Subject: Re: Cyru
tter size(USA) versus A4(Europe).
>
> SunS
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Rob Siemborski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Scott Adkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 10:07
--On Friday, November 15, 2002 9:36 AM -0500 Rob Siemborski
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 15 Nov 2002, Erik Enge wrote:
Then again, LaTex (or SGML) would probably give you the most
possibilities (and problems ;).
Right, as does HTML (atleast, for our intents and purposes), without the
overhea
On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, Scott Adkins wrote:
> Actually, I develop all my documentation in HTML as well. I still produce
> PDF and PS documents as well. How I acommplish this is that I use IE, go
> to the documented HTML web page, select a printer and print, select the
> little checkbox to SAVE TO F
: "Andrew McNamara" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Rob Siemborski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 9:44 PM
Subject: Re: Cyrus IMAPd 2.1.10 Released
> >I feel that moving back to only plaintext is a step backwards. I
Rob Siemborski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It's really hard to keep formatted in any way that looks reasoanble.
I would say that your editor should take care of that (for me, Emacs
does an excellent job).
> There's also the fact that markup languages let you embed hyperlinks,
> etc.
Did you
On 15 Nov 2002, Erik Enge wrote:
> Then again, LaTex (or SGML) would probably give you the most
> possibilities (and problems ;).
Right, as does HTML (atleast, for our intents and purposes), without the
overhead of having to learn a new toolset and language (or the complexity
of LaTeX).
I guess
>I feel that moving back to only plaintext is a step backwards. I don't
>know much about SGML myself, so I'm not sure I'd want to be stuck
>maintaining that, but it sounds interesting enough (and it would be nice
>to have general tools for keeping the documentation formatted, instead of
>worrying
On 14 Nov 2002, Erik Enge wrote:
> What's wrong with plain text?
It's really hard to keep formatted in any way that looks reasoanble.
For example, say you have a bulleted list (or an ordered list, both of
which we have throughout our documentation)
You probably want it to look something like:
Lawrence Greenfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If someone has a good idea of how to make the documentation easier to
> deal with, we're all for it.
What's wrong with plain text?
Erik.
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 02:35:02PM -0500, Lawrence Greenfield wrote:
>Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 10:56:07 -0500
>From: Scott Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> [...]
>Sooo... any reason why the docs aren't sgml and then built for text,
>html, ps, etc? Think of this as less of a request and m
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 10:56:07 -0500
From: Scott Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[...]
Sooo... any reason why the docs aren't sgml and then built for text,
html, ps, etc? Think of this as less of a request and more of 'would
CMU be interested' type question. :)
No objections, but it's
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 10:37:50AM -0500, Rob Siemborski wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, Rob Siemborski wrote:
>
> > I'll look into what's going on, but the HTML version is correct.
> I've fixed both of these issues. You can pull an updated source for
> htmlstrip.c from cvs now, but since the doc
On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, Rob Siemborski wrote:
> I'll look into what's going on, but the HTML version is correct.
htmlstrip (our html-to-plaintext converter) apparently didn't support
", which a recent update to install-configure added, we missed it
because failure to build the text directory wasn't
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 03:57:57PM -0500, Rob Siemborski wrote:
> I'm pleased to announce the release of Cyrus IMAPd 2.1.10. This is mostly
> a bug-fix and cleanup release, with the notable new feature of Berkeley DB
> 4.1 support.
One of the documentation changes appears to remove a bunch of key
On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, Scott Russell wrote:
> One of the documentation changes appears to remove a bunch of key
> instructions from the /doc/text/install-configure file. Everything
> after step 8. appears to be gone in the 2.1.10 release. I don't think
> this was intentional since it looks like ther
I'm pleased to announce the release of Cyrus IMAPd 2.1.10. This is mostly
a bug-fix and cleanup release, with the notable new feature of Berkeley DB
4.1 support.
Full details are available in doc/changes.html file that is included in
the distribution.
As always, the distribution is available at:
26 matches
Mail list logo
