Hi everybody,
What about branching (or tagging) at least online docs (available on Pike's site), so that every particular change/feature/desription will not float in air? I mean, currently there is no way to distinguish which feature is implemented in which version, and if there will be some indicators (like "Added in 7.7) it would be a bit better...
Or, perhaps, just splitting online docs into two (7.6/7.7) would do the trick? PS: Should I expect that everyone will suggest me to install local copy of docs instead? :) Regards, /Al
No, since you already suggested it. :-)
Seriously, it is a good idea. You are very welcome to implement it, if you can. Tagging it up explicitly is probably the best way of doing it (perhaps a @version autodoc keyword, i e @version 7.5.23).
/ Johan Sundström (Achtung Liebe!)
Previous text:
2004-05-06 22:21: Subject: Docs branching/tagging?
Hi everybody,
What about branching (or tagging) at least online docs (available on Pike's site), so that every particular change/feature/desription will not float in air?
I mean, currently there is no way to distinguish which feature is implemented in which version, and if there will be some indicators (like "Added in 7.7) it would be a bit better...
Or, perhaps, just splitting online docs into two (7.6/7.7) would do the trick?
PS: Should I expect that everyone will suggest me to install local copy of docs instead? :)
Regards, /Al
/ Brevbäraren
A far more easy way is to have an html rendered version that comes from each branch. Sure, there's still a bit of undocumented stuff that might become documented only in a later version, but then it's just a matter of surfing to the later version while keeping in mind that there might be stuff there that doesn't apply.
The main manual available at the web site should of course be for the last released version.
/ Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS
Previous text:
2004-05-06 22:27: Subject: Docs branching/tagging?
No, since you already suggested it. :-)
Seriously, it is a good idea. You are very welcome to implement it, if you can. Tagging it up explicitly is probably the best way of doing it (perhaps a @version autodoc keyword, i e @version 7.5.23).
/ Johan Sundström (Achtung Liebe!)
Sure, assuming minor version granularity is enough.
/ Johan Sundström (Achtung Liebe!)
Previous text:
2004-05-09 17:02: Subject: Docs branching/tagging?
A far more easy way is to have an html rendered version that comes from each branch. Sure, there's still a bit of undocumented stuff that might become documented only in a later version, but then it's just a matter of surfing to the later version while keeping in mind that there might be stuff there that doesn't apply.
The main manual available at the web site should of course be for the last released version.
/ Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS
I at least plan to make a tar.gz of the current documentation and put it somewhere for historic reference.
/ Martin Nilsson (räfsfiskal)
Previous text:
2004-05-06 22:21: Subject: Docs branching/tagging?
Hi everybody,
What about branching (or tagging) at least online docs (available on Pike's site), so that every particular change/feature/desription will not float in air?
I mean, currently there is no way to distinguish which feature is implemented in which version, and if there will be some indicators (like "Added in 7.7) it would be a bit better...
Or, perhaps, just splitting online docs into two (7.6/7.7) would do the trick?
PS: Should I expect that everyone will suggest me to install local copy of docs instead? :)
Regards, /Al
/ Brevbäraren
it would be good to have at least the docs of the latest stable version up for browsing. that is what people will use. the development version is only usefull for the curious or for those developing pike.
changes in the module hierarchy make the devel version docs not very usable as a reference for the stable version.
greetings, martin.
pike-devel@lists.lysator.liu.se
-
Alexander Demenshin -
Johan Sundstr�m (Achtung Liebe!) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum -
Martin Bähr -
Martin Nilsson (r�fsfiskal) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum
-
Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS ＠ Pike developers forum