Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Marco van de Voort hat am 28. März 2012 um 16:59 geschrieben: > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 09:54:01AM +0200, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > > > > > > 1. One can be offline, the other not. > > > > You can make offline snapshots of the wiki. > > Ah, that is working again? Since when? A db dump is stil

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 09:54:01AM +0200, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > > > > 1. One can be offline, the other not. > > You can make offline snapshots of the wiki. Ah, that is working again? Since when? And how do I show it? Probably extracting the contents and properly relinking and indexing it ne

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 20:46:32 +0200 Marco van de Voort wrote: > On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 01:00:08PM +0100, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > > > > There is no big difference between a link from one fpdoc file to another > > (e.g. LCL to RTL) and between a fpdoc element and a wiki page. > > 1. One can be

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 01:00:08PM +0100, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > > There is no big difference between a link from one fpdoc file to another > (e.g. LCL to RTL) and between a fpdoc element and a wiki page. 1. One can be offline, the other not. 2. One is versioned per lazarus version, one is not

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

> > Is anybody else lined up to take over? >> > > I don't know. > > Vincent > > > -- > ___ > Lazarus mailing > listLazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.orghttp://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus > > I'll be happy to do it. > > I have s

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/03/12 20:44, Vincent Snijders wrote: Op 2 maart 2012 10:27 schreef Richard Mace > het volgende: Is anybody else lined up to take over? I don't know. Vincent -- ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.laza

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Op 2 maart 2012 10:27 schreef Richard Mace het volgende: > Is anybody else lined up to take over? > I don't know. Vincent -- ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Is anybody else lined up to take over? Richard On 2 March 2012 07:40, Vincent Snijders wrote: > Op 2 maart 2012 00:04 heeft Frank Church het > volgende geschreven: > > Googling brought up this link - > > http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Google_Custom_Search_Engine > > > > Who is the web

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Op 2 maart 2012 09:39 heeft Frank Church het volgende geschreven: > That's disappointing, but could you at the very least add the Google > Search Option, before you quit, PLEASE?  :) I think the most honest answer is: no. Vincent -- ___ Lazarus mailin

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

That's disappointing, but could you at the very least add the Google Search Option, before you quit, PLEASE? :) On 02/03/2012, Vincent Snijders wrote: > Op 2 maart 2012 00:04 heeft Frank Church het > volgende geschreven: >> Googling brought up this link - >> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extens

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Op 2 maart 2012 00:04 heeft Frank Church het volgende geschreven: > Googling brought up this link - > http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Google_Custom_Search_Engine > > Who is the webmaster of the wiki and can this be forwarded to him? I was, but I want to stop doing it. Vincent -- ___

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 01/03/2012, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote: > On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Graeme Geldenhuys > wrote: >> In that case, could we ask the wiki maintainers to please disable the >> wiki Search and Index functions, and rather embed a Google Search in >> it's place. > > Yes, that would be a

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Am Donnerstag, den 01.03.2012, 14:15 +0100 schrieb Hans-Peter Diettrich: > Marc Santhoff schrieb: > > Am Donnerstag, den 01.03.2012, 01:22 +0100 schrieb Hans-Peter Diettrich: > >> Marc Santhoff schrieb: > >> > >>> A complete index, yes. To the right on > >>> > >>> http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.o

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Am Donnerstag, den 01.03.2012, 14:28 +0100 schrieb Hans-Peter Diettrich: > Vincent Snijders schrieb: > > Op 1 maart 2012 08:12 heeft Graeme Geldenhuys > > het volgende geschreven: > >> On 1 March 2012 02:22, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote: > >>> The results are very strange. Entering "documentation"

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Op 1 maart 2012 14:28 heeft Hans-Peter Diettrich het volgende geschreven: > Vincent Snijders schrieb: > >> Op 1 maart 2012 08:12 heeft Graeme Geldenhuys >> het volgende geschreven: >>> >>> On 1 March 2012 02:22, Hans-Peter Diettrich  wrote: The results are very strange. Entering "docume

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Marc Santhoff schrieb: Am Donnerstag, den 01.03.2012, 01:22 +0100 schrieb Hans-Peter Diettrich: Marc Santhoff schrieb: A complete index, yes. To the right on http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/ under the headline "Navigation" there is a link to it. The results are very strange. Entering "d

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Vincent Snijders schrieb: Op 1 maart 2012 08:12 heeft Graeme Geldenhuys het volgende geschreven: On 1 March 2012 02:22, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote: The results are very strange. Entering "documentation" finds almost all pages, because these have this keyword in the headline and navigation men

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: > In that case, could we ask the wiki maintainers to please disable the > wiki Search and Index functions, and rather embed a Google Search in > it's place. Yes, that would be a great solution. Unfortunately I don't have access to the wiki

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 1 March 2012 10:09, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote: > > lol! Only if you don't know how to use Google. It flawlessly finds > everything I need by searching for "lazarus wiki searchterm". Totally defeats the point of the Search and Index features on the wiki then, doesn't it? In that case,

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 05:59 PM, Marc Santhoff wrote: THIS IS NOT ROCKET SCIENCE! Hm, for me it looks like it is. At least I feel that (regarding the initial thought that dives this thread) a quite "normal" User who wants to help improving the Documentation will be frustrated. -Michael --

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 05:54 PM, Marc Santhoff wrote: Reading about this type of confusion - count me in - I need to ask: Where is the process of building up help files documented? In fact (after the work in progress has stabilized), the documentation should be quite short. Hopefully, finally, there s

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Op 1 maart 2012 08:12 heeft Graeme Geldenhuys het volgende geschreven: > On 1 March 2012 02:22, Hans-Peter Diettrich  wrote: >> >> The results are very strange. Entering "documentation" finds almost all >> pages, because these have this keyword in the headline and navigation menu. > > > It even fi

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 8:12 AM, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: > The wiki is utterly useless and broken!! If you don't know the > directly link to what you are looking for, chances are you will never > find it. lol! Only if you don't know how to use Google. It flawlessly finds everything I need by sear

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

1. Are they created by a tool or hand edited? what are the tools used? Source documentation is generated using FPDoc. The tool makeskel parses the source file and generates a xml file which the documentation will reside in. Documentation for e.g. IDE usage is done in the Wiki. 2. Is there

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 1 March 2012 02:22, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote: > > The results are very strange. Entering "documentation" finds almost all > pages, because these have this keyword in the headline and navigation menu. It even finds result pages where the entered word doesn't appear _anywhere_ in the wiki pag

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Am Donnerstag, den 01.03.2012, 01:22 +0100 schrieb Hans-Peter Diettrich: > Marc Santhoff schrieb: > > > A complete index, yes. To the right on > > > > http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/ > > > > under the headline "Navigation" there is a link to it. > > The results are very strange. Entering

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Duh - ignore me - Index shows the results STARTING AT the entered value string. > I agree - the results are strange. > I used index to search for "VST" and the first links ("Var", "Varies") did > not contain "VST". -- ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@li

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

> > Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2012 01:22:34 +0100 > From: Hans-Peter Diettrich > Subject: Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation > To: Lazarus mailing list > Message-ID: <4f4ec14a.9080...@aol.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Marc S

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Marc Santhoff schrieb: A complete index, yes. To the right on http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/ under the headline "Navigation" there is a link to it. The results are very strange. Entering "documentation" finds almost all pages, because these have this keyword in the headline and navig

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Am Mittwoch, den 29.02.2012, 20:43 +0100 schrieb Hans-Peter Diettrich: > Marc Santhoff schrieb: > > > One name I remember (from huge masses of emails) is FPDocManager. Is > > that a class or a tool? > > It's a project in examples/fpdocmanager. It shall allow even newbies to > create their own lo

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Am Mittwoch, den 29.02.2012, 13:47 -0600 schrieb John Repucci: > Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 19:32:47 +0100 > From: Marc Santhoff > Subject: Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation > To: Lazarus mailing list > > Message-ID: <1

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Marc Santhoff schrieb: One name I remember (from huge masses of emails) is FPDocManager. Is that a class or a tool? It's a project in examples/fpdocmanager. It shall allow even newbies to create their own local documentation. It also allows FPDoc documentation writers to create skeletons for

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

> > Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 19:32:47 +0100 > From: Marc Santhoff > Subject: Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation > To: Lazarus mailing list > Message-ID: <1330540367.57395.61.ca...@zaphod.das.netz> > Content-Type: text/plain > > Am Mittwoch, den 29.02.2012, 18:15 +

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 28 February 2012 18:43, Marc Santhoff wrote: > Hi again, > > since there were multiple complaints about missing documentation, where > can I find a list of what is missing exactly in detail? > > Is there a wiki page about it? Or a docs page collecting empty > descriptions or the like? > > Some

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 29 February 2012 18:59, Marc Santhoff wrote: > Developers of ölazarus do know, they use it. For me as a user of > lazarus, using it to make progrms and source libraries, it is pretty > confusing to follow the threads about these non documented workflows. All the various documentations I mention

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Em 28/02/2012 16:06, Mattias Gaertner escreveu: On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 19:43:48 +0100 Marc Santhoff wrote: Hi again, since there were multiple complaints about missing documentation, where can I find a list of what is missing exactly in detail? Is there a wiki

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Am Mittwoch, den 29.02.2012, 18:15 +0100 schrieb Hans-Peter Diettrich: > Marc Santhoff schrieb: > > > Where is the process of building up help files documented? Seen from my > > current knowledge there are many new tools and facts I do not know or > > understand. > > In the source directories, i.

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Am Mittwoch, den 29.02.2012, 18:22 +0100 schrieb Mattias Gaertner: > > Marc Santhoff hat am 29. Februar 2012 um 17:54 > geschrieben: > > >[...] > > > > > Showing is simple: Just move the mouse over an identifier. > > > > > About destroying: You apparently have not tried it. > > > > I talked

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Marc Santhoff hat am 29. Februar 2012 um 17:54 geschrieben: >[...] > > > > Showing is simple: Just move the mouse over an identifier. > > > > About destroying: You apparently have not tried it. > > > I talked about showing / seeing my modifications. > > > > > Michael, PLEASE try to use the to

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Marc Santhoff schrieb: Where is the process of building up help files documented? Seen from my current knowledge there are many new tools and facts I do not know or understand. In the source directories, i.e. in $fpcdocs (wherever you checked it out), or in Lazarus/docs/html. The procedures v

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Am Mittwoch, den 29.02.2012, 15:45 +0200 schrieb Graeme Geldenhuys: > On 29 February 2012 15:36, Michael Schnell wrote: > [ I apologise if I sound frustrated with you, but it probably is because I > am. ] LOL > * fpdoc is well documented. So usage should not be a problem. > * LCL, fpGUI etc al

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Am Mittwoch, den 29.02.2012, 13:07 +0100 schrieb Mattias Gaertner: > > Michael Schnell hat am 29. Februar 2012 um 12:25 > geschrieben: > > >[...] > > There only can be a single source for the help > Where do you get this attitude? > > You are using open source, you should know better.

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Michael Schnell schrieb: It's a bit frustrating to see Graeme, DoDi, Sven and others try to improve the help itself and especially the help generation process, while I can't see the common "final goal" in focus (one or more online and offline versatile help viewers / file formats being fed and

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Michael Schnell schrieb: On 02/29/2012 12:37 PM, Sven Barth wrote: (of course nightly snapshots... Maybe automatic nightly snapshots fed into the svn might be more workable for potential doc writers than being able to decently review their work with the next "release", but anyway, splitting th

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 2/29/2012 10:41, Rich Saunders wrote: On 2/29/12 7:25 AM, Mattias Gaertner wrote: Is it just me or are your excuses for not-contributing getting desperate? I think I'm seeing a fair amount of miscommunication going on in this thread. I think that's the more likely reason why it goes on.

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 04:15 PM, Reinier Olislagers wrote: I'm sorry, but then I suggest you stop bothering the list with your posts... Agreed. - Michael -- ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mail

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 2/29/12 7:25 AM, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > > Is it just me or are your excuses for not-contributing getting desperate? > I think I'm seeing a fair amount of miscommunication going on in this thread. I think that's the more likely reason why it goes on. --

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 29-2-2012 14:02, Michael Schnell wrote: > On 02/29/2012 12:59 PM, Sven Barth wrote: >> >> As already written: >> * either use the editor hints of the IDE which work on the FPDoc files >> in %laz%\doc\xml >> * or build the help files yourself >> > Obvious best option: * do nothing. > > -Michael

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Mattias Gaertner schrieb: Not having top priority and being "NOT interested" are two different things. AFAIK everyone agreed that having all help offline would be nice feature. ACK The wiki is frequently edited by many people and already contains more than 2500 pages. It makes no sense to sh

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Michael Schnell schrieb: On 02/29/2012 11:26 AM, Mattias Gaertner wrote: The wiki is frequently edited by many people and already contains more than 2500 pages. It makes no sense to shut it down. But if there is no way to keep it in sync with the FPDoc files, how is the future of either consi

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Mattias Gaertner schrieb: And it it does open: Is the helpful user supposed to use the wiki to improve the help text ? This would make the Wiki database the primary help source. It is since many years. This IMO is a bad idea, as long as many Lazarus versions are used concurrently, with di

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 02:53 PM, michael.vancann...@wisa.be wrote: None of this is an excuse for not contributing. You are perfectly right, but ... (see my answer to Graeme). -Michael -- ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://li

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 02:45 PM, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: [ I apologise if I sound frustrated with you, but it probably is because I am. ] ... No wonder regarding That I do complain about missing tools but don't have the the resources to decently follow the different paths suggest by you and others an

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, Michael Schnell wrote: On 02/29/2012 02:27 PM, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: The new INF help generated from fpdoc files, now have a nice hyperlinked class hierarchy as well with each class description. A patch for fpdoc will be supplied soon. It's a bit frustrating to see Gr

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 29 February 2012 15:36, Michael Schnell wrote: > > It's a bit frustrating to see Graeme, DoDi, Sven and others try to improve > the help itself and especially the help generation process, while I can't > see the common "final goal" in focus (one or more online and offline > versatile help viewe

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 02:27 PM, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: The new INF help generated from fpdoc files, now have a nice hyperlinked class hierarchy as well with each class description. A patch for fpdoc will be supplied soon. It's a bit frustrating to see Graeme, DoDi, Sven and others try to improve the

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 29 February 2012 13:25, Michael Schnell wrote: > offline help from the svn sources and failed multiple times (in action with > DocView, even trying to find out how this should be done with CHM.) I created new LCL help in INF format over the weekend, using fpdoc from latest 2.7.1. The only issu

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Sven Barth hat am 29. Februar 2012 um 13:42 geschrieben: > Am 29.02.2012 12:57, schrieb Michael Schnell: > > On 02/29/2012 12:54 PM, Sven Barth wrote: > >> > >> Michael already wrote in one of the recent discussions that he wants > >> to create a webpage (using fpweb of course ) that will al

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 12:59 PM, Sven Barth wrote: As already written: * either use the editor hints of the IDE which work on the FPDoc files in %laz%\doc\xml * or build the help files yourself Obvious best option: * do nothing. -Michael -- ___ Lazarus mail

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Am 29.02.2012 13:01, schrieb Michael Schnell: On 02/29/2012 12:57 PM, Sven Barth wrote: Contributors for source documentation need to edit the fpdoc files (e.g. those from the SVN checkout) and commit the changes (either as patch or directly if they have SVN write access). Regarding that this

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Am 29.02.2012 12:57, schrieb Michael Schnell: > On 02/29/2012 12:54 PM, Sven Barth wrote: >> >> Michael already wrote in one of the recent discussions that he wants >> to create a webpage (using fpweb of course ) that will allow to >> edit the FPDoc help entries (I'll try to find the mail). >> >>

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Michael Schnell hat am 29. Februar 2012 um 12:57 geschrieben: > On 02/29/2012 12:54 PM, Sven Barth wrote: > > > > Michael already wrote in one of the recent discussions that he wants > > to create a webpage (using fpweb of course ;) ) that will allow to > > edit the FPDoc help entries (I'll try

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 01:04 PM, michael.vancann...@wisa.be wrote: Do you simetimes actually listen to what we say here ? Seemingly I misunderstood and you are right to be angry . You can perfectly review your changes in at least 2 ways: 1. Hover the mouse over the identifier in the IDE. The IDE will

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Michael Schnell hat am 29. Februar 2012 um 12:25 geschrieben: >[...] > There only can be a single source for the help Where do you get this attitude? You are using open source, you should know better. >[...] > > Showing is simple: Just move the mouse over an identifier. > > About destroying

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, Michael Schnell wrote: On 02/29/2012 12:54 PM, Sven Barth wrote: Michael already wrote in one of the recent discussions that he wants to create a webpage (using fpweb of course ;) ) that will allow to edit the FPDoc help entries (I'll try to find the mail). Also ther

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 12:57 PM, Sven Barth wrote: Contributors for source documentation need to edit the fpdoc files (e.g. those from the SVN checkout) and commit the changes (either as patch or directly if they have SVN write access). Regarding that this discussion started in the issue how to allow m

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Sven Barth hat am 29. Februar 2012 um 12:08 geschrieben: > Am 29.02.2012 11:33, schrieb Michael Schnell: > > On 02/29/2012 11:26 AM, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > >> The wiki is frequently edited by many people and already contains more > >> than 2500 pages. It makes no sense to shut it down. > > >

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 12:54 PM, michael.vancann...@wisa.be wrote: Where did you see that fpdoc is priviledged ? Anyone can download and work on it, and submit patches. See my answer to Sven. -Michael -- ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepas

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Am 29.02.2012 12:48, schrieb Michael Schnell: On 02/29/2012 12:37 PM, Sven Barth wrote: (of course nightly snapshots... Maybe automatic nightly snapshots fed into the svn might be more workable for potential doc writers than being able to decently review their work with the next "release", but

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 12:54 PM, Sven Barth wrote: Michael already wrote in one of the recent discussions that he wants to create a webpage (using fpweb of course ;) ) that will allow to edit the FPDoc help entries (I'll try to find the mail). Also there is always the way that works today: edit the e

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, Michael Schnell wrote: On 02/29/2012 12:32 PM, Sven Barth wrote: Did you read Matthias' answers? He wrote that he's working on a tool to export the Wiki entries for e.g. CHM, so this is not a problem... So some part of the offline help is produced by FPdoc and thus "pr

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Am 29.02.2012 12:50, schrieb Michael Schnell: On 02/29/2012 12:32 PM, Sven Barth wrote: Did you read Matthias' answers? He wrote that he's working on a tool to export the Wiki entries for e.g. CHM, so this is not a problem... So some part of the offline help is produced by FPdoc and thus "pri

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 12:32 PM, Sven Barth wrote: Did you read Matthias' answers? He wrote that he's working on a tool to export the Wiki entries for e.g. CHM, so this is not a problem... So some part of the offline help is produced by FPdoc and thus "privileged" (an non-core member of the community

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 12:37 PM, Sven Barth wrote: (of course nightly snapshots... Maybe automatic nightly snapshots fed into the svn might be more workable for potential doc writers than being able to decently review their work with the next "release", but anyway, splitting the help proceedings in two

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 12:36 PM, michael.vancann...@wisa.be wrote: That your changes are not distributed at once after you've submitted them is another matter entirely. Submitting of course is another matter. I vote for a review by some kind of "committee" before submitting. This is what svn is inve

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Am 29.02.2012 12:28, schrieb Michael Schnell: > On 02/29/2012 12:08 PM, Sven Barth wrote: >> The Wiki is used for documenting e.g. the usage of the IDE. You can't >> do this using FPDoc. > This would mean that there never will be any offline help for Lazarus > users. > > That would really be a bad

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Am 29.02.2012 12:31, schrieb Michael Schnell: On 02/29/2012 11:34 AM, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote: For SVN users the best option would be the wiki still. Resulting in their work never can be included in the offline help. Very bad. Why do you say that? Once a relese is about to be done

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On Wed, 29 Feb 2012, Michael Schnell wrote: On 02/29/2012 11:34 AM, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote: I think it would be perfectly fine to generate 1 new offline IDE CHM for each release and ship Lazarus with it. This discussion is about how to enable non-core members to help improving th

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 12:30 PM, Sven Barth wrote: It won't, because the Wiki is the source for this kind of help and where editing takes place. I am sure that this will lead to perfect confusion and help content for ever unusable (for logical causes not for technical ones.) -Michael --

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 11:34 AM, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote: For SVN users the best option would be the wiki still. Resulting in their work never can be included in the offline help. Very bad. -Michael -- ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazaru

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Am 29.02.2012 12:25, schrieb Michael Schnell: On 02/29/2012 11:33 AM, Mattias Gaertner wrote: Is the wiki supposed to be the upcoming help source, thus invalidating FPDoc and friends ? Are you kidding? fpdoc is great. There only can be a single source for the help so either FPDoc or directly ma

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 11:34 AM, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote: I think it would be perfectly fine to generate 1 new offline IDE CHM for each release and ship Lazarus with it. This discussion is about how to enable non-core members to help improving the docs. Your claim would prevent this as the

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 12:08 PM, Sven Barth wrote: The Wiki is used for documenting e.g. the usage of the IDE. You can't do this using FPDoc. This would mean that there never will be any offline help for Lazarus users. That would really be a bad thing. -Michael --

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 11:33 AM, Mattias Gaertner wrote: Is the wiki supposed to be the upcoming help source, thus invalidating FPDoc and friends ? Are you kidding? fpdoc is great. There only can be a single source for the help so either FPDoc or directly managing the Wiki kontent "is great" not both.

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

Am 29.02.2012 11:33, schrieb Michael Schnell: On 02/29/2012 11:26 AM, Mattias Gaertner wrote: The wiki is frequently edited by many people and already contains more than 2500 pages. It makes no sense to shut it down. But if there is no way to keep it in sync with the FPDoc files, how is the fu

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote: > If you can contribute > something which can generate such a wiki to CHM conversion, then I > suppose it could be repeated in the future with much less work then > the first time. Aha, I missed that Mattias is already working o

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: > And, what's the point is me doing an HTML (from the wiki) to INF > conversion, and then the next day somebody updates the wiki pages > again. The INF (or CHM) help would always be out of date. I think it would be perfectly fine to gener

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 11:24:31 +0100 Michael Schnell wrote: > On 02/29/2012 11:10 AM, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > > I started it. > Please elaborate. I started a tool to download the wiki and convert it to other formats. I'm still evaluating possibilities. > Is the wiki supposed to be the upcomi

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 11:26 AM, Mattias Gaertner wrote: The wiki is frequently edited by many people and already contains more than 2500 pages. It makes no sense to shut it down. But if there is no way to keep it in sync with the FPDoc files, how is the future of either considered to be ? -Michael

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 11:17 AM, Mattias Gaertner wrote: How do you hook into the IDE dialog help system? Is this by registering yet another help package? Yes. How would the IDE decide between a HTML, CHM or INF help system for the dialogs in the IDE? Whatever the user installs. This is nice (for the m

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 11:43:46 +0200 Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: > On 29 February 2012 10:57, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > > Have you seen any secondary help for the dialogs? > > > And, what's the point is me doing an HTML (from the wiki) to INF > conversion, and then the next day somebody updates the

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 11:10 AM, Mattias Gaertner wrote: I started it. Please elaborate. Is the wiki supposed to be the upcoming help source, thus invalidating FPDoc and friends ? In fact I don't have a decent opinion on whether this is a good idea, but I do recommend considering the implications (i

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 11:39:32 +0200 Graeme Geldenhuys wrote: > On 29 February 2012 10:57, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > > > > Have you seen any secondary help for the dialogs? > > How do you hook into the IDE dialog help system? Is this by > registering yet another help package? Yes. There are som

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 10:23:18 +0100 Michael Schnell wrote: > On 02/29/2012 09:57 AM, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > > It is since many years. Have you seen any secondary help for the dialogs? > I don't understand what you mean. I think there should be single source > for online and offline help. Ever

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 29 February 2012 10:57, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > Have you seen any secondary help for the dialogs? And, what's the point is me doing an HTML (from the wiki) to INF conversion, and then the next day somebody updates the wiki pages again. The INF (or CHM) help would always be out of date. So w

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 29 February 2012 10:57, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > > Have you seen any secondary help for the dialogs? How do you hook into the IDE dialog help system? Is this by registering yet another help package? How would the IDE decide between a HTML, CHM or INF help system for the dialogs in the IDE? A

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 10:23 AM, Michael Schnell wrote: (Many thanks to DoDi for trying to get involved!). Many thanks to Graeme as well ! -Michael -- ___ Lazarus mailing list Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/li

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/29/2012 09:57 AM, Mattias Gaertner wrote: It is since many years. Have you seen any secondary help for the dialogs? I don't understand what you mean. I think there should be single source for online and offline help. Everything else obviously is not manageable at all. (In fact I don't see

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 09:34:14 +0100 Michael Schnell wrote: > On 02/28/2012 08:06 PM, Mattias Gaertner wrote: > > If you want to write some help about an IDE dialog: Use F1 to open the > > wiki page. If it does not open, or opens the wrong page, just write an > > email, so I can fix it. > If this

Re: [Lazarus] Missing Documentation

On 02/28/2012 08:06 PM, Mattias Gaertner wrote: If you want to write some help about an IDE dialog: Use F1 to open the wiki page. If it does not open, or opens the wrong page, just write an email, so I can fix it. If this happens rather often this is no possible way to go. And it it does open:

  1   2   >