The first file users access is index.html. May be we could add there the date of the last ChangeLog entry instead of the revision history.
But I can't program this...

Julien

Is it possible to add as a text field somewhere on the site a time stamp of the last succesfull build date?

Hi,

On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 11:01 +0100, Marco Ciampa wrote:

The html code on the site is usually quite often rebuild and the pages are always updated (thanks!) nevertheless sometimes is useful to know the precise date of the last build.

The pages all have revision information already. Did you just miss that?

Sven

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

Hi,

Am 16.01.2008 um 20:35 schrieb Sven Neumann:

Hi,

On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 11:01 +0100, Marco Ciampa wrote:

The html code on the site is usually quite often rebuild and the pages are
always updated (thanks!) nevertheless sometimes is useful to know the precise date of the last build.

The pages all have revision information already. Did you just miss that?

The revision date shows the date when a specific page was modified for that language. What Marco is looking for is the date when docs.gimp.org/xx was build.

Greetings

lexA

Sven

Hi,

On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 21:07 +0100, Axel Wernicke wrote:

The revision date shows the date when a specific page was modified for that language. What Marco is looking for is the date when docs.gimp.org/xx was build.

I understand that. What I don't understand is what this information would be good for. The date when the page was last modified seems to be a lot more useful than the time when the HTML was generated. I fail to see any value in that information.

Sven

No, docs.gimp.org/en/index.html has the date 2007-07-15. That's not the last
Changelog entry date, I mean the last modification date for 'en' help.

Julien

The pages all have revision information already. Did you just miss that?

Sven

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

Hi,
Am 16.01.2008 um 21:11 schrieb Sven Neumann:

Hi,

On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 21:07 +0100, Axel Wernicke wrote:

The revision date shows the date when a specific page was modified for
that language. What Marco is looking for is the date when docs.gimp.org/xx was build.

I understand that. What I don't understand is what this information would be good for. The date when the page was last modified seems to be
a lot more useful than the time when the HTML was generated. I fail to see any value in that information.

Well I don't see the value either. May be he just wants to make sure that Romanofskis "nightly" job succeeded :)

Sven

On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 09:47:09PM +0100, julien wrote:

No, docs.gimp.org/en/index.html has the date 2007-07-15. That's not the last
Changelog entry date, I mean the last modification date for 'en' help.

Dates are currently only assigned if a file has changed, not the entire manual.

The only solution I can think of is either adding an additional HTML snippet which marks the built timestamp of the manual (using XSLT for example) or every author which modifies English (or whatever language) also need to change the date on gimp.xml.

Greetings,

This discussion was silent for quite a time.

If someone this should be added to the frontpage, could someone for the requesters file a bugreport? That'll be helpful not to forget this feature requrest.

Greetings,

Hi,

On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 10:42 +0100, Roman Joost wrote:

This discussion was silent for quite a time.

Well, perhaps because no one ever explained what this information would be good for.

Sven

Sven Neumann (Dienstag, 29. Januar 2008, 09:00):

Hi,

On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 10:42 +0100, Roman Joost wrote:

This discussion was silent for quite a time.

Well, perhaps because no one ever explained what this information would be good for.

Perhaps it doesn't matter.

If the html pages will be rebuilt e.g. nightly, why not just tell him/us? Or, for example, tell us how we can verify if building the html code last night/week/whatever succeeded (instead of creating this useless thread)?

After all, GIMP is not a typical German departure or ministry, is it?

Ulf

On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 12:36:38PM +0100, Ulf-D. Ehlert wrote:

Sven Neumann (Dienstag, 29. Januar 2008, 09:00):

Well, perhaps because no one ever explained what this information would be good for.

Perhaps it doesn't matter.

If the html pages will be rebuilt e.g. nightly, why not just tell him/us? Or, for example, tell us how we can verify if building the html code last night/week/whatever succeeded (instead of creating this useless thread)?

The docs are currently only by myself and therefore dependant on my spare time. Sometimes I can build them every day, sometimes not. I would be very happy if we can do this automatically on wilber, but afraid that won't happend in the near future because of the lack of free space.

After all, GIMP is not a typical German departure or ministry, is it?

So we need something which tells the authors if their changes are already visible online or not?

Greetings,

Hi,

On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 12:36 +0100, Ulf-D. Ehlert wrote:

Or, for example, tell us how we can verify if building the html code last night/week/whatever succeeded (instead of creating this useless thread)?

But you can easily verify that by looking at the Revision of the pages that you changed. That's why I am asking why this is not sufficient. If there is a good reason to include the build date also, then I am sure that this could be arranged.

Sven

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

Hi,

Am 29.01.2008 um 14:35 schrieb Roman Joost:

On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 12:36:38PM +0100, Ulf-D. Ehlert wrote:

Sven Neumann (Dienstag, 29. Januar 2008, 09:00):

Well, perhaps because no one ever explained what this information would be good for.

Perhaps it doesn't matter.

[x]

The docs are currently only by myself and therefore dependant on my

spare time. Sometimes I can build them every day, sometimes not. I would
be very happy if we can do this automatically on wilber, but afraid that
won't happend in the near future because of the lack of free space.

so, may be we should focus on a more automated build system for the nightly builds?
Could it be the case, that the "little space left on wilber" issue is more than a year old? Any chance to "fix" that? Shouldn't be a matter of money - is it?

Greetings, lexA

Greetings,

Hi,

On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 23:01 +0100, Axel Wernicke wrote:

Could it be the case, that the "little space left on wilber" issue is more than a year old? Any chance to "fix" that? Shouldn't be a matter of money - is it?

It is not a matter of money. It is a matter of Yosh not acting even though he promised multiple times that he would get to it real soon now. :-(

Sven