Re: DOCBOOK: Re: Building Where is the bibliography ?

[Holger Krug <hkrug@rationalizer.com>]

On Mon, May 06, 2002 at 11:17:12AM -0400, Dan York wrote:
> > Last time we (the DocBook Open Repository team) discussed it, the
> > general feeling was that Make was still more broadly available than
> > ant and was thus more appropriate.
> 
> 100% agreed... warts and all, make is still the only thing you can count
> on finding on pretty much all versions of Linux/UNIX.  ant isn't there yet.

I think, this is not very important, because "Making Docbook" is not
an everyday work. Only a very tiny percentage of docbook users ever
will make docbook. For those who decide to do it, it should be the
simplest task to download and install ant.

Today it is very difficult to *make docbook*, it takes several hours
to find all the resources needed, to modify the scripts, to evaluate
the error messages. That's not because make is used, that's because
other tasks seem to be more important than to streamline the build
process. But it shows that the criteria of broad availability are not
decisive.

-- 
Holger Krug
hkrug@rationalizer.com