From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Enge Subject: bug#22687: Online manual not updated automatically Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 17:25:04 +0100 Message-ID: <20160216162504.GC5914@solar> References: <20160215215024.GA22646@jasmine> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39841) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aViRz-0004Zn-Rr for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 11:26:08 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aViRu-0004mK-Ol for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 11:26:07 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:39574) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aViRu-0004mF-JJ for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 11:26:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aViRu-00026p-Bq for bug-guix@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 11:26:02 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Ricardo Wurmus Cc: 22687@debbugs.gnu.org On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 11:06:40AM +0100, Ricardo Wurmus wrote: > Many other projects publish online manuals for both stable and > development versions. As our releases are a little far apart and we’re > encouraging to do “guix pull” (so users really run the development > version) I think it would indeed make sense to also publish an > up-to-date version of the manual along with the manual for the latest > release. Or alternatively, release more often :-) I wonder whether we should not make a point release after each security update instead of encouraging people to use "guix pull" (but we would quickly arrive at 0.9.9 now, after which only 1.0.0 would be a reasonable option to keep numerical and lexicographical ordering consistent). Or a point-point release as 0.9.0.1 and so on. Andreas