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

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: 'make doc' (was:Re: Documentation standard ??)
From:       Michael Koch <m_koch () bigfoot ! de>
Date:       1999-07-07 16:31:12
[Download RAW message or body]

Am Mit, 07 Jul 1999 schrieb Matthias Elter:
> On Wed, 07 Jul 1999, Michael Koch wrote:
> > Am Mit, 07 Jul 1999 schrieb Stephan Kulow:
> > > Michael Koch wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > >
> > > > > Well, I like to have the documentation in the headers.
> > > > 
> > > > Well, the documentation is in the headers, but some people (like me) want to
> > > > have HTML- or TEX-Documentation of the API. Thatīs why Iīm using kdoc every day.
> > > > 
> > > Well, I was refering to the way doxygen does it. There most stuff is in
> > > the sources.
> > 
> > Ah, I see, another concept.
> > 
> > We need to decide this. When the pre-2.0-libs (1.89) are shipped, there should
> > be a HTML-documentation included or as extra tgz or whatever. Thats for
> > developers switching to KDE-2.0 programming. Different documentation tools used
> > in the libs are very bad.
> 
> Have a look into current Linux distros, most if not all do not ship with KDE
> library docu...know why? Packagers are lazy ;) they don't want to download kdoc
> (kdesdk) and generate the docu by hand. Why not simply move kdoc into kdesupprt
> (its just a few KB) and add a 'docu' target to kdelibs/Makefile.am
> (Stephan?:) that automagically generates the docu?

Arrgh.

Where should the docu be saved ? How should it be available via apache (or
other www-server) ?

The user has to decide this questions.

Ciao, 
Michael Koch

KDE fan, enthusiast and developer
projects: Katabase and KImageShop
writing documentation of KOM/OP

student of computer science at
university of applied sciences
Darmstadt, Germany

koch@kde.org
m_koch@bigfoot.de
mkoch@mail.riednet.wh.tu-darmstadt.de
http://www.riednet.wh.tu-darmstadt.de/~mkoch

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