Re: Monodoc print support patch - feedback needed.

Mario, 

my responses below:

- raf

On Thu, 2005-09-08 at 17:13 +0200, Mario Sopena wrote:
> Hey,
> 
> On 9/6/05, Rafael Ferreira <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Mario,
> > 
> > here's the updated patch. It took me some time to get this to you
> > because I updated my docbrowser and monodoc sources so I had to merge
> > the printing patch upstream. This time I basically edited the
> > browser.glade file by hand, adding only the needed entries.
> > 
> > Let me know what you could use a hand with next.
> 
> I took your patch and worked a little bit with it. This are the things
> I've changed:
> 
> - Since we already have an abstraction for separing Gecko and GtkHTML
> with IHtmlRender and the two implementations (Gtk and Gecko), I've
> moved all the printing logic to them, so we can get rif of
> IPrintManager and GtkHTMLPrintManager. I do think is more sane now. I
> have used a Print method only with a parameter, the html code, because
> when using css, the html code returned by the HelpSource already has
> the css.
Makes sense to me. My patch was hacked without much knowledge of the
underlying monodoc structure. 
> 
> - The print menu item is only clickable when you are not editing a node
> 
> - I've encountered problems because the two kinds of Url presents in
> monodoc (with your patch, the browser crashed when printing a node
> which was accesed through the treeview). I think now it works.
I'll try to track this down further since it sounds like a possible
issue with the provider no returning the node's html.

> 
> - The ecma provider was not tracking well the use_css variable. Now,
> it will print the html according to it. (For the moment, everything
> without css)
> 
> - I've left out the thing with gnome-stock-about and gtk-about because
> I'm not sure it's really important now, try to open a bug in bugzilla.
> 
	AFAIK, the gnome-stock icons are deprecated. I believe we can safely
change that to gtk-stock-about without adding any regression problems. 

> By the way, I think the monodoc section of bugzilla is forgoten and
> unmaintained. Miguel, can you give me permission to deal with it?
> 
> Comments?
	Monodoc's bugzilla has been pretty dead for some time now... I remember
there's even an old patch that I submitted in there. 


Overall everything sounds good Mario, I hope the patch makes into the
next release.  


> 
> Mario

_______________________________________________
Mono-docs-list maillist  -  [email protected]
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-docs-list