Re: [PHP-DOC] Livedocs Status?
I've also a bug list here, that I'll try to fix when I have some time. I don't think that branching is the right way to go. I prefer posting my patches somewhere with a description and then let someone to review, comment and apply/discard them. I agree. My branch proposal was because it seemed the few people with karma were not paying attention. I have been proven wrong in this observation, though. I'd prefer not to branch. Nuno, could you post your bugs list somewhere, if you haven't, already? Thanks, S
Re: [PHP-DOC] Livedocs Status?
Instead of non-specific head is broken email, why not point out what is broken? Livedocs is running fine here; I built it only a week or so ago with no problems. Plus, I have a mirror that updates daily (livedocs.thebrainroom.net) with no problems (assuming that someone hasn't broken phpdoc) If you have a patch that works properly, by all means send it our way (either myself, Ilia, Derick or Goba). What we don't want is a half-baked patch that fixes stuff for one person/case and that breaks everything else; and that is the reason we tightened up the karma--some of us are *already* running livedocs in production. I've seen plenty of people say that livedocs isn't ready, but non of them have said why or come up with a firm list of what needs to be done to make it ready, let alone come up with patches for that. Would it help to open a new Livedocs issue type of bug at bugs.php.net, so people can submit problems / (links to) patches there? I have heard people submit trouble tickets at thebrainroom lately (AFAIR philip did that). It would be better to cleanly provide a way to report bugs against livedocs, now that it is getting used more and more. Goba
Re: [PHP-DOC] Livedocs Status?
Hi Sean, Currently the way of getting changes commited to the 'livedocs' in CVS is to submit patches to those who have karma. When submitting patches, remeber to do 'cvs diff -u' and save this patch to your website and mail them the link and explain to them what you are trying to do with the patch. Certain patches will not be commited and sometimes they will only after the commiter has changed the code slightly for coding standards or for some performance issues, etc. Regards --jm On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 10:59:51 -0400, Sean Coates [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [This is a follow-up post to my previous post, Livedocs woes.] What is the current status of livedocs development? My understanding is that anyone with phpdoc karma, also, once, had livedocs karma. A commit was made that some maintainers did not like, and karma was removed, and only granted to certain people (Currently: iliaa,goba,wez,derick,sfox,alan_k). Please correct me if I am wrong. There are several outstanding issues with the livedocs code. As I said in my post, last night, HEAD seems broken. Also, Nuno has a number of patches available at http://livedocs.aborla.net/ My point? I'd like to determine the proper procedure for patching (getting patches approved for) livedocs, or find an alternative development method. I realize that livedocs is not ready for production, as it is intended. It is, however VERY useful for doc team members (see Philip's posts re: CHANGELOG and the EXIF changes he made for a practical example). I also understand that the original authors of livedocs don't want their code messed with. Isn't this the beauty of CVS, though? I suspect this idea won't be well-received, but if we're not willing/able to keep livedocs HEAD up to date, could we not branch the module for testing purposes? Karma could be re-granted on a per-case basis, with the condition that non-core developers do not commit to HEAD, but to the dev branch. My understanding of the staleness of livedocs is that Ilia and Wez are busy on PHP 5. I understand this. People like Nuno, though, have demonstrated a knowledge of livedocs code, and should be able to contribute, IMHO. I'd also like to see livedocs tagged regularly so we can easily rollback to a previous version (last night, while getting livedocs running, and failing miserably, I was tempted to start pulling random dates out for cvs up -D ). I'm not trying to point fingers, here, I'd just like to see livedocs move forward. Can we find a way to make this happen? can type=worms state=open / S -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFBHijnWppknrQMxQIRAtiKAKCCWFtGKzlPxyn4Y3pMydqMVvCT0gCfXQsJ YihNZTBf+dl39Ch7BAODaNc= =UqpZ -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- Jacques Marneweck http://www.powertrip.co.za/blog/
Re: [PHP-DOC] Livedocs Status?
What is the current status of livedocs development? Accepting patches (applied mostly by Ilia and Wez). There are several outstanding issues with the livedocs code. As I said in my post, last night, HEAD seems broken. Also, Nuno has a number of patches available at http://livedocs.aborla.net/ It would be nice if Ilia (and/or Wez) could review these patches, and apply / comment on them. My point? I'd like to determine the proper procedure for patching (getting patches approved for) livedocs, or find an alternative development method. I realize that livedocs is not ready for production, as it is intended. It is, however VERY useful for doc team members (see Philip's posts re: CHANGELOG and the EXIF changes he made for a practical example). I also understand that the original authors of livedocs don't want their code messed with. Isn't this the beauty of CVS, though? I suspect this idea won't be well-received, but if we're not willing/able to keep livedocs HEAD up to date, could we not branch the module for testing purposes? Karma could be re-granted on a per-case basis, with the condition that non-core developers do not commit to HEAD, but to the dev branch. My understanding of the staleness of livedocs is that Ilia and Wez are busy on PHP 5. I understand this. People like Nuno, though, have demonstrated a knowledge of livedocs code, and should be able to contribute, IMHO. I'd also like to see livedocs tagged regularly so we can easily rollback to a previous version (last night, while getting livedocs running, and failing miserably, I was tempted to start pulling random dates out for cvs up -D ). I'm not trying to point fingers, here, I'd just like to see livedocs move forward. Can we find a way to make this happen? All this is actually up to livedocs core developers (Ilia, Wez, Derick). BTW Derick offered a setup of livedocs to go for live testing at docs.php.net for this week. Goba
Re: [PHP-DOC] Livedocs Status?
On August 14, 2004 04:23 pm, you wrote: There are several outstanding issues with the livedocs code. As I said in my post, last night, HEAD seems broken. Also, Nuno has a number of patches available at http://livedocs.aborla.net/ It would be nice if Ilia (and/or Wez) could review these patches, and apply / comment on them. I reviewed the patches and applied 7 of them, thanks guys. The Cygwin patch was not applied because I have not way to test it and the last person I spoke to who build the manual on win32 via Cygwin had no issues. What in HEAD is broken? My point? I'd like to determine the proper procedure for patching (getting patches approved for) livedocs, or find an alternative development method. Follow, Nuno example :-). He is doing great work, which for the most part gets into CVS once Wez or I have the time to review it. I also understand that the original authors of livedocs don't want their code messed with. Isn't this the beauty of CVS, though Why commit if it'll be reverted. I suspect this idea won't be well-received, but if we're not willing/able to keep livedocs HEAD up to date, could we not branch the module for testing purposes? Karma could be re-granted on a per-case basis, with the condition that non-core developers do not commit to HEAD, but to the dev branch. My understanding of the staleness of livedocs is that Ilia and Wez are busy on PHP 5. I understand this. People like Nuno, though, have demonstrated a knowledge of livedocs code, and should be able to contribute, IMHO. I'd also like to see livedocs tagged regularly so we can easily rollback to a previous version (last night, while getting livedocs running, and failing miserably, I was tempted to start pulling random dates out for cvs up -D ). There are some critical bugs in the code in particular dealing with pregeneration logic that fails to create some pages. While it's mostly self contained inside pregenerate.php there are some spillbacks to other files. Until that is resolved I'd like to keep once branch only, once that is fixed we can tag a stable release as that's the only major issue I am aware of at this point. Ilia
Re: [PHP-DOC] Livedocs Status?
Ilia, I reviewed the patches and applied 7 of them, thanks guys. The Cygwin patch was not applied because I have not way to test it and the last person I spoke to who build the manual on win32 via Cygwin had no issues. What in HEAD is broken? Thank you very much. I know you're busy, I really appreciate your attention. HEAD, see http://news.php.net/php.doc/969363165 Nuno did not have these problems, but Curt Zirzow helped me install, and he had some of the same problems (VACUUM, etc) -- perhaps my software was out of date. Follow, Nuno example :-). He is doing great work, which for the most part gets into CVS once Wez or I have the time to review it. It seemed that this process was not working, hence my email. I was wrong. Now that we've seen this process work, it seems productive to contribute. Thanks again. (-: There are some critical bugs in the code in particular dealing with pregeneration logic that fails to create some pages. While it's mostly self contained inside pregenerate.php there are some spillbacks to other files. Until that is resolved I'd like to keep once branch only, once that is fixed we can tag a stable release as that's the only major issue I am aware of at this point. That sounds great (the tags, not the bugs (-: ). I look forward to a livedocs-stable. Thanks again, Ilia. Nuno, thanks to you, too. S
