patch: link to portable mandoc

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

patch: link to portable mandoc

Ingo Schwarze
OK?

>> CVSROOT: /cvs
>> Module name: src
>> Changes by: [hidden email] 2013/10/06 17:59:59
>>
>> Modified files:
>> usr.bin/mandoc : Makefile
>>
>> Log message:
>> Yesterday, i released (portable) mandoc 1.12.2, so bump our VERSION, too.
>> No merging is needed; basically, mandoc is developed here and mdocml.bsd.lv
>> is not really "upstream", but just OpenBSD plus compatibility goo.  All the
>> same, the exercise is far from useless: NetBSD, FreeBSD, and DragonFly have
>> mandoc in base, NetBSD uses it by default to show manuals, and FreeBSD and
>> DragonFly have finally come close to switching away from groff as well.
>> Useful bug reports come in and help making our mandoc better.
>> Maybe we should list mandoc as an OpenBSD associated project on index.html.

Index: index.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/www/index.html,v
retrieving revision 1.649
diff -u -r1.649 index.html
--- index.html 10 Sep 2013 19:11:57 -0000 1.649
+++ index.html 7 Oct 2013 08:38:28 -0000
@@ -115,7 +115,8 @@
 <a href="http://www.openntpd.org">OpenNTPD</a>,
 <a href="http://www.opencvs.org">OpenCVS</a>,
 <a href="http://www.opensmtpd.org">OpenSMTPD</a>,
-<a href="http://www.openiked.org">OpenIKED</a>
+<a href="http://www.openiked.org">OpenIKED</a>,
+<a href="http://mdocml.bsd.lv">mandoc</a>
 </small>
     <hr>
 Mirrors, by country:

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: patch: link to portable mandoc

Nick Holland
On 10/07/13 04:42, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> OK?

about the broad general idea?  Sure, if it is "our" project, it should
be there.  I always like pointing out to people when they are using
OpenBSD products...or when they should. :)

HOWEVER, if you go to the other projects linked there, there's a
difference both in terms of the "flavor" of the website AND the outright
statement "... is part of the OpenBSD Project".  Whether mandoc "needs"
a Puffy logo, dunno (probably not), but I guess I would like to at least
see a link back saying that mandoc is an OpenBSD project.

That's not a non-ok, but a small personal reservation.  I'm fine with
being overruled. :)

Nick.

>>> CVSROOT: /cvs
>>> Module name: src
>>> Changes by: [hidden email] 2013/10/06 17:59:59
>>>
>>> Modified files:
>>> usr.bin/mandoc : Makefile
>>>
>>> Log message:
>>> Yesterday, i released (portable) mandoc 1.12.2, so bump our VERSION, too.
>>> No merging is needed; basically, mandoc is developed here and mdocml.bsd.lv
>>> is not really "upstream", but just OpenBSD plus compatibility goo.  All the
>>> same, the exercise is far from useless: NetBSD, FreeBSD, and DragonFly have
>>> mandoc in base, NetBSD uses it by default to show manuals, and FreeBSD and
>>> DragonFly have finally come close to switching away from groff as well.
>>> Useful bug reports come in and help making our mandoc better.
>>> Maybe we should list mandoc as an OpenBSD associated project on index.html.
>
> Index: index.html
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/www/index.html,v
> retrieving revision 1.649
> diff -u -r1.649 index.html
> --- index.html 10 Sep 2013 19:11:57 -0000 1.649
> +++ index.html 7 Oct 2013 08:38:28 -0000
> @@ -115,7 +115,8 @@
>  <a href="http://www.openntpd.org">OpenNTPD</a>,
>  <a href="http://www.opencvs.org">OpenCVS</a>,
>  <a href="http://www.opensmtpd.org">OpenSMTPD</a>,
> -<a href="http://www.openiked.org">OpenIKED</a>
> +<a href="http://www.openiked.org">OpenIKED</a>,
> +<a href="http://mdocml.bsd.lv">mandoc</a>
>  </small>
>      <hr>
>  Mirrors, by country:

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: patch: link to portable mandoc

Ingo Schwarze
Hi,

Nick Holland wrote on Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 07:49:30AM -0400:

> about the broad general idea?  Sure, if it is "our" project,
> it should be there.

It certainly is.  It didn't really gain traction before it was
imported into our tree.  Both main developers develop almost
exclusively on OpenBSD.  It matured because the OpenBSD base system
heavily and uncompromisingly relied on it before anybody else did.
Very relevant parts of the development were done during OpenBSD
hackathons.  During the last year, the majority of patches have
been committed to OpenBSD before being committed to the portable
version of mandoc at bsd.lv.  OpenBSD-current and even the OpenBSD
5.4 release had the code that is now called mandoc 1.12.2
long before that 1.12.2 release was made.

And that's not just Kristaps and my point of view, other projects
look at it the same way, see for example

  http://www.shiningsilence.com/dbsdlog/2013/10/07/12575.html
  http://www.shiningsilence.com/dbsdlog/2009/10/28/4952.html

> I always like pointing out to people when they are using
> OpenBSD products...or when they should. :)
>
> HOWEVER, if you go to the other projects linked there, there's a
> difference both in terms of the "flavor" of the website AND the outright
> statement "... is part of the OpenBSD Project".  Whether mandoc "needs"
> a Puffy logo, dunno (probably not),

Well, maybe it didn't absolutely need it, but thanks for the nice idea,
it looks good.  Also try clicking on the Puffy on http://mdocml.bsd.lv/ .

> but I guess I would like to at least see a link back saying
> that mandoc is an OpenBSD project.

Sure, that was missing.  Fixed now.

So, after improving these points, i put the link onto the page today.

Thanks for you feedback,
  Ingo