[Kde-bindings] RubberDoc 0.000001
Richard_Dale at tipitina.demon.co.uk
Mon Jan 19 11:14:30 UTC 2004
On Monday 19 January 2004 10:46, Alexander Kellett wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 09:43:09AM +0000, Richard Dale wrote:
> > Yes, all ok now, apart from the yellow highlights a bit wonky. Is that
> > RDOC rendered as html?
> "a bit wonky"?
> thats the working incremental highlighting search :)
> its just html, the idea is that i should be able
> to use the same browser for the khtml api docs, the
> qt docs, and the ruby references :)
Ah, sorry - I see what it means now. I'm keen to do a kde doc comment to rdoc
conversion similar to what I did for the java bindings javadoc comments. I
think that would be really useful in conjunction with RubberDoc.
> > Oh well, I'd quite like to try the examples, add fixes etc, which isn't
> > so easy when things are all over the place. Surely we can start working
> > normally in the kdebindings HEAD again shortly?
> cvs was down last night which prevented me from working.
> thats basically for me the last straw. this RubberDoc thing
> doesn't really fit under the kdebindings branch anyways as
> its a useful application on its own. otoh, i suppose i could
> just keep it in sync with my local arch repo.
Yes, a documentation browser is a really important part of the rad
environment, not just a demo thing really. With over 950 classes there is so
much stuff that you really need a tool more powerful than rbqtapi.
> > The main thing is you managed to get it into the HEAD before the release,
> > so the source will be in KDE 3.2 even if not built by default. So we have
> > a bridgehead for the 3.2.1 release, when we can update the sources and
> > add all the examples. Otherwise, I think we would have had to have waited
> > 6 months or so for 3.3, and we might as well have put the whole thing on
> > rubyforge.
> yeah. i'm still thinking thats not a bad idea as i'm
> not sure what the head kde honchos are going to say
> about devel like commits to the branch.
If you check everything in when it's 100% finished, you lose all the cvs
history which is often useful.
> fyi, i will enable korundum/qtruby compilation for 3.2.1
> blarf (alex zepeda) did some much needed srcdir!=builddir
> fixes, so hopefully for 3.2.1 no one will have any build
> problems whatsoever.
There's a blog here about the Quanta guy getting into a mess with cvs
branches. It's not just us, they are indeed an error prone nightmare (imo)
that should be avoided unless essential:
More information about the Kde-bindings