> > On Wed, 2016-05-25 at 10:21 +0200, Pavel Grunt wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Fri, 2016-05-20 at 06:44 -0400, Frediano Ziglio wrote: > > > Hi, > > > I'd like to have some standard on the internal documentation of spice- > > > server. > > > > > Yes, that would be nice. > > > > > The current situation is quite messy having different styles. > > > I think the worst think is not having any documentation, so better messy > > > than nothing. > > > I really like Doxygen as it's really complete tool however my Gtk-doc > > > knowledge > > > is very low and I cannot compare the two. > > > > "GTK-Doc has some special code to document the signals and properties of > > GTK+ > > widgets and GObject classes which other tools may not have." [0] > > This is a big one. I know that doxygen has some nice features that gtk-doc > may > not, but for any project using GObject I think gtk-doc is pretty much > essential. > It makes it simple to document signals, properties, and GObject inheritance > where other tools would not really understand these concepts. >
I think they are quite fair, in the same page "For a more polished general-purpose documentation tool you may want to look at Doxygen." bye the way, as I cannot compare the two 3 people over 3 prefer Gtk-doc so it's decided! Frediano > > > > > But I think the same can be achieved with Doxygen. > > > > > I know we use quite a lot of "G" stuff so perhaps people feels more > > > comfortable > > > with Gtk-doc. > > > I'd like to see the documentation generated and possibly published on web > > > so suggestion from the guys who maintain the website are really welcome. > > > > Both Doxygen and gtk-doc can be used. We are using gtk-doc for spice-gtk, > > it > > is > > not planned to switch to something else. > > > > [0] http://www.gtk.org/gtk-doc/ > > > > Pavel _______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
