Hi Folks, As we are getting somehow closer to Wine 1.2 i wonder how important updates on the Documentation are. Further i am confused about sending patches, should they just change the git-repo "docs" or the pages on the website or both? -- Best Regards, André Hentschel
On 03/12/2010 11:01 AM, André Hentschel wrote:
Hi Folks, As we are getting somehow closer to Wine 1.2 i wonder how important updates on the Documentation are. Further i am confused about sending patches, should they just change the git-repo "docs" or the pages on the website or both?
The website pages are supposed to be automatically generated from the docs every release. So patch the docs themselves. Not sure if this process still works though. Thanks, Scott Ritchie
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 11:40 PM, Scott Ritchie <scott(a)open-vote.org> wrote:
On 03/12/2010 11:01 AM, André Hentschel wrote:
Hi Folks, As we are getting somehow closer to Wine 1.2 i wonder how important updates on the Documentation are. Further i am confused about sending patches, should they just change the git-repo "docs" or the pages on the website or both?
The website pages are supposed to be automatically generated from the docs every release. So patch the docs themselves.
Not sure if this process still works though.
Thanks, Scott Ritchie
I thought the plans were to attempt to move all documentation (in an updated form) to the Wiki. We would then need some mechanism to create documentation out of the wiki. Myself I rather update the wiki when I encounter an issue than that I update the old docs. Roderick
On 14 March 2010 10:03, Roderick Colenbrander <thunderbird2k(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 11:40 PM, Scott Ritchie <scott(a)open-vote.org> wrote:
On 03/12/2010 11:01 AM, André Hentschel wrote:
Hi Folks, As we are getting somehow closer to Wine 1.2 i wonder how important updates on the Documentation are. Further i am confused about sending patches, should they just change the git-repo "docs" or the pages on the website or both?
The website pages are supposed to be automatically generated from the docs every release. So patch the docs themselves.
Not sure if this process still works though.
Thanks, Scott Ritchie
I thought the plans were to attempt to move all documentation (in an updated form) to the Wiki. We would then need some mechanism to create documentation out of the wiki. Myself I rather update the wiki when I encounter an issue than that I update the old docs.
Roderick
While on the subject of documentation... would it be a good idea to begin documenting functions with something like Doxygen or similar? I'm just wondering if we could be building our own, much more accurate, MSDN. Is there a reason that Wine isn't documented in this way? Luke.
On 03/14/2010 11:45 AM, Luke Benstead wrote:
On 14 March 2010 10:03, Roderick Colenbrander<thunderbird2k(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 11:40 PM, Scott Ritchie<scott(a)open-vote.org> wrote:
On 03/12/2010 11:01 AM, André Hentschel wrote:
Hi Folks, As we are getting somehow closer to Wine 1.2 i wonder how important updates on the Documentation are. Further i am confused about sending patches, should they just change the git-repo "docs" or the pages on the website or both?
The website pages are supposed to be automatically generated from the docs every release. So patch the docs themselves.
Not sure if this process still works though.
Thanks, Scott Ritchie
I thought the plans were to attempt to move all documentation (in an updated form) to the Wiki. We would then need some mechanism to create documentation out of the wiki. Myself I rather update the wiki when I encounter an issue than that I update the old docs.
Roderick
While on the subject of documentation... would it be a good idea to begin documenting functions with something like Doxygen or similar? I'm just wondering if we could be building our own, much more accurate, MSDN. Is there a reason that Wine isn't documented in this way?
We do have (the autogenerated) http://source.winehq.org/WineAPI/ I know there is (was) an issue with the winapi tool so I can't tell if the API documentation on that page is accurate. -- Cheers, Paul.
On 03/14/2010 11:58 AM, Paul Vriens wrote:
On 03/14/2010 11:45 AM, Luke Benstead wrote:
On 14 March 2010 10:03, Roderick Colenbrander<thunderbird2k(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 11:40 PM, Scott Ritchie<scott(a)open-vote.org> wrote:
On 03/12/2010 11:01 AM, André Hentschel wrote:
Hi Folks, As we are getting somehow closer to Wine 1.2 i wonder how important updates on the Documentation are. Further i am confused about sending patches, should they just change the git-repo "docs" or the pages on the website or both?
The website pages are supposed to be automatically generated from the docs every release. So patch the docs themselves.
Not sure if this process still works though.
Thanks, Scott Ritchie
I thought the plans were to attempt to move all documentation (in an updated form) to the Wiki. We would then need some mechanism to create documentation out of the wiki. Myself I rather update the wiki when I encounter an issue than that I update the old docs.
Roderick
While on the subject of documentation... would it be a good idea to begin documenting functions with something like Doxygen or similar? I'm just wondering if we could be building our own, much more accurate, MSDN. Is there a reason that Wine isn't documented in this way?
We do have (the autogenerated) http://source.winehq.org/WineAPI/
I know there is (was) an issue with the winapi tool so I can't tell if the API documentation on that page is accurate.
I think the page I mentioned is fine. It's http://www.winehq.org/winapi_stats that didn't have an update in a while due to winapi issues. -- Cheers, Paul.
On 14 March 2010 12:08, Paul Vriens <paul.vriens.wine(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 03/14/2010 11:58 AM, Paul Vriens wrote:
On 03/14/2010 11:45 AM, Luke Benstead wrote:
On 14 March 2010 10:03, Roderick Colenbrander<thunderbird2k(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 11:40 PM, Scott Ritchie<scott(a)open-vote.org> wrote:
On 03/12/2010 11:01 AM, André Hentschel wrote:
Hi Folks, As we are getting somehow closer to Wine 1.2 i wonder how important updates on the Documentation are. Further i am confused about sending patches, should they just change the git-repo "docs" or the pages on the website or both?
The website pages are supposed to be automatically generated from the docs every release. So patch the docs themselves.
Not sure if this process still works though.
Thanks, Scott Ritchie
I thought the plans were to attempt to move all documentation (in an updated form) to the Wiki. We would then need some mechanism to create documentation out of the wiki. Myself I rather update the wiki when I encounter an issue than that I update the old docs.
Roderick
While on the subject of documentation... would it be a good idea to begin documenting functions with something like Doxygen or similar? I'm just wondering if we could be building our own, much more accurate, MSDN. Is there a reason that Wine isn't documented in this way?
We do have (the autogenerated) http://source.winehq.org/WineAPI/
I know there is (was) an issue with the winapi tool so I can't tell if the API documentation on that page is accurate.
I think the page I mentioned is fine.
It's http://www.winehq.org/winapi_stats that didn't have an update in a while due to winapi issues.
-- Cheers,
Paul.
Oh, I had actually seen that auto-generated documentation once before then lost it - still there are many functions without documentation. Would documentation-only patches be accepted? For example, I can use my lunch break at work to document functions but it's not long enough to do any serious hacking. I only ask because I can't remember seeing documentation only patches on wine-patches :) Luke.
Would documentation-only patches be accepted? For example, I can use my lunch break at work to document functions but it's not long enough to do any serious hacking. I only ask because I can't remember seeing documentation only patches on wine-patches :)
Indeed, yes. There have been some documentation only patches submitted and accepted once upon a time, but not in a while. --Juan
Luke Benstead <kazade(a)gmail.com> writes:
While on the subject of documentation... would it be a good idea to begin documenting functions with something like Doxygen or similar? I'm just wondering if we could be building our own, much more accurate, MSDN. Is there a reason that Wine isn't documented in this way?
Yes, it's not useful. Wine implements the Win32 API, and there's plenty of documentation for it already. If you want to replicate MSDN you are welcome to do it, but there's no reason to do it in Wine, the Win32 API is not defined by the Wine code. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org
participants (7)
-
Alexandre Julliard -
André Hentschel -
Juan Lang -
Luke Benstead -
Paul Vriens -
Roderick Colenbrander -
Scott Ritchie