Re: [PHP-GTK] Status of PHP-GTK
[email protected] (Steph) Wed, 15 Apr 2009 17:05:16 +0100
| Newsgroups | php.gtk.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Elizabeth M Smith wrote: > Eddie L. Hixson wrote: >> On Wed, 2009-04-15 at 08:40 -0400, Bob Majdak Jr wrote: >>> I always love how so many people say this and so few people have/willing Ain't that the truth. >> Say What? Are you referring to coding or documentation. I have seen >> many people offer to help with documentation and have been put off for >> some reason or another. This isn't. > No one has been "put off" by anything - but when the things that NEED to > be done are listed people are scared off. Unfortunately the docs are > not even in a condition where you can just "fill out information in > skeletons" atm. That's very odd. Three years ago they were in such condition, but nobody wanted to do the work then either. Loads of would-be translators, but precious few actual manual contributions once Christian and I had moved on. The manual was always auto-generated following any changes, and this is the first I've heard that it no longer works for the English edition. All I ever hear about is broken notes. The manual currently uses an adaptation of DocBook 3.17, and we have been through two new documentation-building projects for php.net manuals since that build system was written. The first of those projects (livedocs) would have required a complete rewrite to work properly with PHP-GTK docs purely because PHP documentation/DocBook isn't geared to objects; we got livedocs to build, but not to be useful. I agree that phd is a far better phpdoc build system (much faster rendering, no extended tools required for manual generation) but would dispute the need for a move to DocBook 5/phd just to get manual entries written. It's more a 'nice-to-have' than an imperative, and I recall both myself and Christian wasting a lot of time over livedocs that could have been better invested elsewhere. Both livedocs and phd assume a 'pure' DocBook base. See the ML archives for the problems with that when it comes to PHP-GTK (2001 and 2004-5). > For the documentation > 1. all the docbook needs to be updated to Docbook 5 (it's at 3 now) I believe there was some reason we didn't make the move to DocBook 4 in the first place, since it was originally in the plans. Check the ML archives. > there are several people in php-gtk working on this, if you want to help > contact them (best place is freenode #php-gtk) > <snip /> > > PHP-GTK could also do with an automake guru - there need to be some > changes made to the configure stuff for HEAD that are not yet completed, > but we don't currently have someone skilled enough at writing m4 macros ;) Jani has been known to assist when we ask nicely and/or mention the need somewhere in public space. Not that m4 macros are horribly difficult, it's just when you need something to build across a wide range of systems it gets complicated. Jani has over a decade of making PHP build on a toaster behind him; you aren't going to find anyone who knows more. So really it's a case of getting PHP-GTK to build on the systems you have access to (Linux/MacOSX), and then asking for his help to broaden the range. >> I have a simple Redhat Linux Fedora 9 install and can't build. >> >> If the goal is to have people use and build on it. It has to work. > > If all you need is a stable build - that's what tags in cvs are for, > they are release versions (if you ever want a really fun time, try > building PHP CVS head on a regular basis - ah the unicode madness) Are you trying to put people off? ;) I think what the OP was saying is that he's installed a RH package rather than built PHP-GTK from scratch. This would be the Linux equivalent of downloading a binary. (These days, it's possible to run Linux desktop and not have access to a compiler... madness IMHO, but there you go.) <snip /> > > If you're interested in helping with php-gtk I'd HIGHLY suggest you > visit the IRC channel - it has a lot more going on than the mailing list > - or introduce yourself on the php.gtk.dev list and volunteer "I'm > willing to learn docbook/PhD/C and help out" IRC shouldn't have a lot more going on than the mailing list, full stop, because it means there is no way for anyone outside the current working group to know what's going on. I for one had no idea any of the projects you mentioned above were under way; I only knew about Madeleine's ongoing quest for notes, and that's because she keeps the ML informed. And the OP thought PHP-GTK was a dead project. - Steph > > Thanks, > Elizabeth > >> Eddie >>> to donate the time to do something about it. >>> >>> - bob. >>> >>> >>> Harald Thoeny wrote: >>>> the documentation on the website is a mess ! >>>> >>>> we had a thread on this list with frustrated doc writers.... >>>> myself is also waiting for a better doc system! >>>> >>>> greetings >>>> >>>> harald >>>> >>>> Madeleine D. wrote: >>>>> Not really stale at all, just quiet on this list. Those who have the >>>>> skills are busy working on an update. There's a lot of daily >>>>> activity via kksou.com, some via Gnope.org and even more via IRC. >>>>> >>>>> I think part of the problem is the broken web site for gtk.php.net, >>>>> which sends people off in different directions, but so far, no luck >>>>> on getting fixed. >>>>> >>>>> Madeleine D. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Eddie L. Hixson wrote: >>>>>> Has this project become stale? What is the future of php-gtk? I hear >>>>>> no chatter from the list. >>>>>> >>>>>> Eddie >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >