<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 TRANSITIONAL//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; CHARSET=UTF-8"> <META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="GtkHTML/3.32.2"> </HEAD> <BODY> On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 20:19 -0600, Matt Dew wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> <PRE> On 09/22/2011 03:13 PM, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > On 09/21/11 16:53, Gaetan Nadon wrote: >> On Wed, 2011-09-21 at 14:05 -0600, Matt Dew wrote: >>> --- >>> specs/dbelib.xml | 68 >>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------------- >>> 1 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) >> >> After you fix the long long long one-liner commit text, > > +1 Whoops. Sorry about that. ;/ Fixed and pushed. Shall I post all the other patches, (they all do the same thing) or put up the repos that people can pull or, since the other patches are of the same things, should I just push those? </PRE> </BLOCKQUOTE> No need to post hundreds of identical patches. So as long as they do just change the ids. No "while in there" changes. But please, fix the typo first: capitolization I don't want anyone else making more typos than I do :-) For reference inside the doc, would it not be more appropriate to use xref or something? I thought olink were for refrence across external documents? One drawback of using olinks is that the masterdb may or may not be there. There may be a performance issue as well, or other unforeseen side-effects. No need to use a bigger hammer than necessary. Recall the for olinks to work, the docs need to be installed (as well as masterdb). It is inconvenient for local links to rely on that. No one will complain now, but eventually if people get use to it, and use the doc from their dev build only, the local links would not work. Unless, of course, there is some smarts in docbook to workaround the situation. have you tried it? One suggestion for testing is to take some random sample of documents and test the link actually works. <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE> <PRE> Matt Matt </PRE> </BLOCKQUOTE> </BODY> </HTML>