I'm willing and able to contribute where necessary and opportune.

Regards,
Dan

On 19/10/2011, at 5:06 AM, David Mertens wrote:

> I can do something. At some point I may even do my own writing about
> PDL::PP, which sorely needs more documentation revisions. (There, I've
> ranted about #3. :-)
> 
> David
> 
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Matthew Kenworthy
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> When I run podchecker on the PDL.Tut.PGPLOT.pod file, I
>>> get errors for the O<> constructs.  Shouldn't/Couldn't they
>>> be placed in a =for PDF line so that things don't barf as
>>> a normal pod?  It makes the podchecker program happy
>>> here.... does the output still generate correctly with this
>>> type of line?
>>> 
>>>  =for pdf O<PGPLOTFigs/ex_env1.8.png>
>> 
>> You're quite right - I'd been running podchecker as part of the HTML
>> build process, but forgot to add it to the pod2pdf script. Adding the
>> =for gets rid of the offending statements. Thanks!
>> 
>> Matt
>> 
>> --
>> Matthew Kenworthy / Assistant Professor / Leiden Observatory
>> Niels Bohrweg 2 (#463) / P.O. Box 9513 / 2300 RA Leiden / NL
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Perldl mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Sent via my carrier pigeon.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Perldl mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl


_______________________________________________
Perldl mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.jach.hawaii.edu/mailman/listinfo/perldl

Reply via email to