On Thu, 2005-03-31 at 16:46 +0200, Stefan Kost wrote: > Owen Taylor and Tim Janik agreed that it would be useful to integrate it. > Although I need to appologise, I should have asked you explicitely (I've been
No need to ask. Just keep me updated: I don't want to discourage you from contributing to the gobject documentation. [snip] > 3) links from description to API docs As I already pointed out in an old private mail to you on function links, I would like to see you use a small script to generate the links on each data marked with <function> and <macro> tags. If you want to, I can write the trivial perl code required to do this. I would resist any sort of change to the xml which would require more markup than just marking function names with <function> tags. > Keeping the CVS history is indeed a probelm and would require manual surgery > on > the server. I (personaly) would discontinue the stand-alone document. I don't mind discontinueing the stand-alone document but I would dearly like to see the CVS history kept. All you have to do is to check in the gobject-doc module your modifications (this is why I did ask for a cvs module: for you to be able to work on the module easily) to the current files and then, when the glib maintainers decide it, they can do the proper cvs surgery. Consider this as my blessing to check into the gobject-doc module whatever you want provided you run this before the checkin: "cvs diff -urN | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]". > I would be happy to maintain this part of the document. So if you want you > can What specific part are you refering to ? Are you refering to the whole gobject-doc module ? > just forward me any patches, comment etc.. The few patches I have have been sent have been checked in the cvs module on cvs.gnome.org. regards, Mathieu _______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list