[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Beta or RC by Wednesday evening

From: C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:49:39 -0400

Karl Fogel wrote:
> "C. Michael Pilato" <cmpilato_at_collab.net> writes:
>> Nah, the book claims to document a particular pegged release of
>> Subversion. If the printed work goes stale once 1.6 is released
>> ... well, that's just the way those things go. We still have the
>> online version which can be kept as up-to-date as possible.
> Is there currently reasonably clear notice in the book about elements of
> merge-tracking that a) some users might expect, but b) are not yet
> there, and c) are likely to be there in the future? That's mainly what
> I'm worried about. I haven't had a chance to look yet, though.

I can't speak to that, having not had the chance to digest Ben's work yet.

>> Don't get me wrong -- I'd *love* the help in ensuring that Subversion
>> 1.5.0 is properly documented in the book text, *especially* since Ben,
>> Fitz and I are dancing with O'Reilly right now, trying to release a
>> printed document as close to the 1.5.0 release date as possible. But
>> that added requirement would be new to this release, and is not (in my
>> opinion) something that we-the-Subversion-devs should necessarily
>> assume as a blocker of this release.
> Hmmm. If we edit this while Subversion 1.5 is in beta, does that change
> the dance with O'Reilly?

O'Reilly has been *incredibly* patient through this whole process, and the
business folk there actually understand the complications. We've told them
that we hope to have a basically-ready-to-go drop of the book sources a
couple of weeks after RC1 is released, and they're totally cool with that.
So, not only is editing during "beta" not a problem, it's strongly
encouraged. In fact, I was hoping soon to put out a call to the svn-dev and
book-dev communities for help in validating the book from a technical
standpoint. (It has already gone through the first pass of copyediting with
O'Reilly, so we'd like to reduce unnecessary -- e.g. stylistic -- diffs.)

C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand

Received on 2008-03-12 19:49:56 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.