Re: https://docs.xaraya.com/

In article <ao09i7$mop$1-FogMEOs31dotat4ziPANHlKoq+OfwspIAL8bYrjMMd8@public.gmane.org>, "Doug Daulton \(Apakuni\)" <[email protected]> wrote:
>...
>Included at the moment are phpXREF and phpDOC.   The first generates docs
>from inline comments in the code, the latter is a tool for creating and
>structuring written docs for PHP classes.
>
Cheers for that. But phpDOC doesn't seem to produce any meaningful output
at the moment - is there a way to "convince" it to document functions too, 
rather than starting from classes only ?

>phpDocumentor, which is on deck, may very well do both and provide some cool
>output options (RTFs, Word docs, PDFs, etc.).  More to come as I know more.
>
Maybe this one will be able to document functions :)

>A couple of related issues ...
>
>1. The current XREF is built off of the 09292002 public distro w/o DB tables
>info because I could not get it to install correctly.  What is the most
>recent distro of value to the devs?
>
Hmmmm - in general I'd say the latest tarball, or even better, a daily
snapshot if that isn't too much to handle.

One question I'm asking myself is how this will fit with the different
BitKeeper scenario's, though - I don't suppose it makes sense to
keep a separate xref for each scenario, unless it's a really long-lived
one...

>2.  Is there a need desire for incremental docs for comparison over time?
>If the need exists, what is an appropriate snapshot interval?  Daily?
>Weekly?  Other?   If you guys need this, I will write a cron job to build
>the lib automagically. But, I do not want to do the work if there is no
>need.
>
If you go for a daily update, I'd keep the weekly tarball as a reference.
Later, we should probably keep an xref/doc for the latest public release
as well.

In short, one for each kind of "release" we make. So you might have :
- latest CVS of development (updated daily)
- weekly CVS tarball of development (updated weekly)
- public release tarball (updated when there is one)
- weekly CVS tarball of maintenance (updated weekly)
and perhaps latest CVS of maintenance if that's of interest too, although
things shouldn't change *too* much in there with regards to functions etc.

I'm not sure about *incremental* docs, though. What would they look like,
and would they be useful ? I don't know...

>3.  Do we want this public?  John suggested it in IRC Sunday and most tended
>to agree with him (including me).  That said, I'd like formal direction from
>the PMC before I make this available to the public site.
>
I'd say yes. But I'm not PMC, so that doesn't count :-)

Thanks Doug,

Mike.