Public SourceMage Discussion List

[David Kowis <dkowis AT shlrm.org>]

You know what might be useful in this endeavour? A javadoc style of 
commenting.
We could modify a javadoc generator to generate stuff for bash. Probably not 
too
hard, it's been done for PHP. Then all the documentation would exist within 
the
bash scripts and could be generated. I like the format of generated Javadoc 
too.
but that's just me. Other people might not like it so much. 

PS: I wrote something (it's not the greatest) but it'll do something of what 
we
want it to do. 
http://docs.sourcemage.org   
There's supposed to be a working version of the docmanager there. if anyone
wants to use it I can give them a user and password and they can enter data 
for
 documentation. It cross references function calls in a document and then you
can browse it to figure out what it does. I have a sourceforge project site at
http://sourceforge.net/projects/docmanager
You might find it enlightening to peruse the source (or it might make you 
dumber
:) )
Please let me know what you think of it if you visit it. 
thanks

Quoting Dufflebunk <dufflebunk AT dufflebunk.homeip.net>:

> Proper documentation of sorcery code would be nice. This is one of the
> medium range goals of the team, the short term one it depends on is the
> API. OTOH, anyone who is fairly good at bash can do basic documentation
> of function calls, don't worry about understanding how it works in
> relation to the other parts, just add a note to the comments like 
> #REVISE ME
> 
> Many functions are already documented, see libcodex for how it's done.
> 
> The big picture, however, has to wait until the API stuff is done. The
> reason for this is that it's a mess. We want to simplify and separate
> the libs, but can't do so until we have a spell API, so we don't go
> around breaking all the spells all the time.
> 
> On Thu, 2003-09-04 at 13:14, evraire AT tuwg.com wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > > > It is a real life problem. 
> > > > We must attract new developers. 
> > >  
> > > Any ideas how?  This is a problem that I'd like to resolve, and I've had
> a few 
> > > step up and show interest, but we need more.  ;)  I'm open to ideas on
> how to 
> > > recruit more developers. 
> > 
> >   I think one thing that would help is more comprehensive documentation on
> the internal design and workings of the sorcery system.  It would lower the
> bar a little to new users trying to wrap their brain around the whole thing
> and make it quicker for them to jump in and get their hands wet.  Every now
> and then I get interested in joining, but just the thought of trying to
> understand it all discourages me.  (What can I say: I'm lazy, and thinking 
> is
> just so much work! ;)
> > 
> >   Anyway, just a suggestion!
> > 
> >   Jonathan Evraire
> >   evraire at tuwg.com
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
> 


find ~your -name '*base* | xargs chown :us

-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/