Santi Béjar wrote:
It looks like the html and man branches of git.git.
http://git.kernel.org/?p=git/git.git;a=shortlog;h=html
http://git.kernel.org/?p=git/git.git;a=shortlog;h=man
They are automatically generated when Junio pushes the branches to
kernel.org. Afterwards you can do a "make quick-install-html" and
install the preformated html pages from these branches. They are
generated with the dodoc.sh script from the todo branch in git.git
(look inside for instructions):
http://git.kernel.org/?p=git/git.git;a=blob_plain;f=dodoc.sh;hb=todo
This script only generates the html / man branches, it doesn't help find
the right version for a given git version, right?
The differences are:
- the html / man branches have a strictly linear history and are
centrally maintained. This solves the distribution issue for end users.
But while developping the compiler, the developers may need to go back
in the history of their own development (e.g. when the current compiler
doesn't work anymore), and the suspected usefulness of being able to see
and track differences in the generated code also isn't available for a
strictly central approach.
- the script above is only for creating and committing the derived
files, in a hook similar to the one I suggested in
build/.git/hooks/commit-msg; this is the "cd build; git commit -m
'generated files for source repository commit
> `git rev-parse HEAD`'" part; the more interesting part comes from
automatically finding the right commit in the generated branches for a
given source commit. This is what I intend to solve with the
"intergit-find-matching-commit-in" script. Said in a simpler way: the
git html / man branches do not offer automatically resolvable linking.
Christian.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
