Versioning the CHM Files

[John Arbash Meinel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


...
> Not as I understand it. The URLs should include the release in their
> path, though not in their basename. For example:
> 
> * http://doc.bazaar-vcs.org/bzr.2.0.1/downloads/bzr-en.chm
> * http://doc.bazaar-vcs.org/bzr.2.1.0b1/downloads/bzr-en.chm
> 
>> The main problem with that, is that when building the installer, we
>> basically have to tell it to re-download those files from scratch every
>> time, because we don't have a way to tell locally if the files are up to
>> date. And, in fact, it lead to the fact that the 2.0.0-1 installer has
>> out-of-date help text. (Thanks to DeeJay for finding this.)
> 
> buildout seems to have a caching layer based on basename? Maybe that's
> the issue? If required, I can tweak the basenames but that will
> complicate the installer a little (unless we rename them after fetching
> them).

That seems to be the issue. IMO rather than fighting with this, we
should just be building the documentation as part of the build process.
This would also free us from depending on you to do something manually.

> 
>> IMO, I'd actually rather rebuild the chm files from source as part of
>> the build process, as that can usually be taught whether things need to
>> be rebuilt or whether we can just re-use the source. This will become
>> even more important once we start doing a 2.0.1 release and a 2.1.0b1
>> release, because at that point, we'll need 2 different CHM files at a
>> minimum.
>>
>> Is there a specific reason they cannot be easily rebuilt on demand?
> 
> No reason. You'll need to install Sphinx (requires easy-install to my
> knowledge) and Help Workshop. I'm yet to work out how to compile hhp
> files (generated by Sphinx) to chm on the command line so I'm currently
> using the GUI for that step (unfortunately). Once we work it out, we
> ought to tweak our Makefile (the chm-sphinx rule) accordingly.
> 
> Ian C.
> 

Sounds reasonable. I'm out-of-effort for doing this for 2.0.1, but maybe
for 2.0.2, or only just 2.1.0b2

John
=:->
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkrd5nUACgkQJdeBCYSNAAOHXACfQtgGi9EDLg/uFV6DqcIIXu8x
DosAoNZGbfp5gZ/HTptKLdttzyn5Jax7
=/kFv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----