Re: DOCBOOK: DocBook-XML and conditional sections

[Adam Turoff <adam dot turoff at isinet dot com>]

"Fred L. Drake, Jr." wrote:
>   Since you're dealing with document revisions rather than revisions
> of what's documented, perhaps including all the versions in your text
> isn't the right approach.  Why not use a traditional revisions control
> system for this?  Each "release" can be tagged, and updates to that
> revision can be made on a patches branch for that tag.

That's a valid point, but I believe this is a different problem.

>   This is completely different from Norm's approach; you'll have to
> determine which would work best for your requirements (esp. revision
> patterns) and environment.  I just wanted to make sure that a common
> way of handling such things isn't overlooked; a lot of people place
> code under revision control but not the related documentation, and
> I've never figured out a good reason for that.

What I think Stephane is trying to do is have one document that
describes two versions of the same product.  Much of the text is
shared between the two versions in use.  

The CVS solution would require frequent merging between the v2.1 
and v2.2 branches, while throwing revision="" attributes where 
appropriate allows both documents to share the common bits.  That
keeps the one document on a single CVS branch, keeping the
ability to build documentation for v2.1 and v2.2 concurrently.

-- Adam

PS: How many hours until your book hits the shelves, Norm?  :-)