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

List:       pear-doc
Subject:    Re: [PHP-DOC] Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Modules/Extensions not in 4.3
From:       Gabor Hojtsy <gabor () hojtsy ! hu>
Date:       2002-11-30 12:37:15
[Download RAW message or body]

Well, you raise some points ;)

> Again, IMO, the madness of having no less than 3 different docu systems
> (phpdoc, peardoc and peardoc2) makes very little sense; why not just use
> "one system (tm)" for docs? (let's save some developer brain power for
> more useful things).

We talkes about this at our March Doc meeting. The problem is that the
different doc systems mostly started out from the initial "phpdoc"
repositories system, and developed on their own ways. Reuniting the build
systems under one umbrella would be quite a hard task, and I don't know who
can volunteer on this. It obviously needs more then one person from every
doc team, who understands the system used there, and can work to unite
them. In March, the central build system for all php documentation project
seemed to be a faraway dream...

Well, it also needs to be mentioned, that if you look at the different
parts (php-dev, pear-dev) they also have different coding standards, CVS
rules, etc.), so it's still a trouble for developers.

> So, what I'd like to see (and this seems reasonable, IMO) is:
> 
> o One doc download for the PHP core + bundled extensions (which may
> reside in PECL).
> o One doc download for the PEAR classes + non-bundled PECL extensions
> o One doc download for extension developers (the streams and zend API
> stuff needs a proper home).
> o One doc system to rule them all (but keep it modular of course).

Well, I think we had a wrong picture about PECL (or at least I had),
that the PECL extensions were distributed separately. If all the
extensions are in PECL, the manual should contain the core ones,
bundled with PHP, that's for sure.

We would also like to gain some on moving docs to PEAR/PECL doc tree
as there will be less to translate for the core PHP manual. I don't
think so that any translation team can handle the current size of the
manual and keep it up to date. Some translations had backed off when
faced the size of the work to do to make the translation complete, or
manage a translation at some stage. From an insider view, I can say
that the Hungarian translation also faces such problems now, we are
unable to at least keep the translation up to date...

Goba



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