Albrecht Schlosser wrote:
> Problem #1: The URL's of the doxygen comments may change from one
> generation run to the next, and especially from one version of doxygen
> to the next one (we found a big diff. between 1.5.7 and 1.5.9). This can
> result in loss of comments, or maybe also in "mixing" comments from one
> file with a new file that "inherited" the old URL (maybe).
Mmm -- I suppose at worst we can include a custom tag
in the docs that a post-process could look for, and append
new info to the bottom of each HTML file.
This "post process" could then be applied as part of the
steps to uploading new docs to the website.
I know web scripting pretty well, and feel pretty confident
I could make something that works. The only tricky part I don't
know about is the existing login account stuff. But if I looked
at the existing PHP code, I could probably figure it out. Never
saw the PHP code before; I think that involves web server access,
which I may have and not know it.
At worst, I could test these features on my own website.
> Problem #2: Doxygen uses a sophisticated .css (cascading style sheet)
> file.
Right, though I seem to recall there are ways they supply to
make extensions to that.
Also, it's likely the 'post process' to append the extra HTML
required for the user comments could be a separate page, ie.
where the comments are a separate frame with its own html/css.
> Any ideas for problems #1 and #2 ?
I guess the place to start for me would be to look at what
the PHP code looks like. I have dev access, but I don't think
I have details on how to access the website to view the PHP.
I figure Mike is busy with other stuff, and if so, I can jump
on this.
> When should we make the docs with comments available? Soon or only after
> FLTK 1.3 stabilizes?
My guess is there's no rush -- it probably makes sense to hold
off on user comments until things are stable.
But I wouldn't mind getting a head start.
> Would it be better to make the comments more version-specific, i.e. docs
> with comments for 1.3.0, 1.3.1, 1.3.2, ... or only for 1.3, 1.4, ...?
Mmm, offhand I think it should be the same comments for all,
otherwise good comments that apply to all releases might be missed.
I think the messages will be self regulating; comments "out of date"
can be replied to indicating "fixed in 1.3.2" and "voted down" or
'stowed' to indicate they've been resolved, while not deleting them
entirely.
_______________________________________________
fltk-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
