[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: Using userbase for manuals
From:       Burkhard =?utf-8?q?L=C3=BCck?= <lueck () hube-lueck ! de>
Date:       2012-07-01 18:54:59
Message-ID: 201207012054.59492.lueck () hube-lueck ! de
[Download RAW message or body]

Am Sonntag, 1. Juli 2012, 20:33:26 schrieb Martin Gräßlin:
> Am 01.07.2012 17:45, schrieb Chusslove Illich:
> > But, when program authors do decide that they want to have reference
> > documentation, I don't see how any workflow can be technically more
> > suitable
> > (easier to write, easier to maintain) than the documentation source
> > files
> > residing right with the code, in the program's repository.
> 
> which is not the case. To be honest I have no idea where to find the
> documentation of kwin, but I know it's not in our source code directory.

kdebase/kde-workspace/doc/kcontrol/window*
kdebase/kde-workspace/doc/kcontrol/kwin*

> On the other hand, I know where the documentation is in the wiki -
> google finds it ;-)
> 
> > What I'm not claiming is
> > that documentation sources must be Docbook, and I suspect that
> > Docbook is
> > what's driving many people away from maintaining documentation in
> > this way.
> 
> Yeah, I think you are quite right with that assumption. Even if I knew
> where to find KWin documentation, I would not touch it due to the fact
> that it's docbook (tried it once, decided again that xml is just a form
> of binary and I don't write binary).
> 
That's really crazy, I can't write a simple one-liner code patch without 
getting compile errors, but similar to Yuri I found it easy to write docbook 
markup. 

-- 
Burkhard Lück
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]