"Seeing that nobody is capable or willing
to do it, let's not suddenly make this a big thing. "
I don't believe this is the case, Peop[le would just prefer to write code
than documentation.
We have to hound our coders here the bloody-well docuemtn their code -as
they write it-
This is the only way to ensure that they don't leav the company, and we get
stuck with a product containing 30,000 line of undocumented code.
I know you'all think I don't do much fro DynAPI other than bitch a,d argue.
The thing is, I find it hard to help when 3/4 of my time is spent just
trying to figure out wht the coder was thinking when they wrote a particular
bit of code.
If we had even basic documentation of the new Code, I probably could have
fixed the bug I was takling last night
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pascal Bestebroer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2001 11:07 PM
Subject: RE: [Dynapi-Dev] structure change ideas
> That's exactly my idea, have all these methods and functions (that are
> basically lacking from javascript) be put into the jsextend file.
>
> I don't see why not do it with this release, and not talking about the
> naming here.. but if we are gonna do it, we might as well do it now,
seeing
> that alot of stuff has already changed. If we release the current code
we're
> releasing changed code, but with nothing much new since the last release.
>
> I know all the complaining from people about having to change everything
> again, but then stop using the snapshot, use the latest release. You will
> have less changes to do then when trying to keep up with the daily
> snapshots.
>
> The point about documentation: I don't care. We don't have solid docs at
> this time anyway, so changing is required anyway.. if people want good
solid
> documentation, we need someone that can do that on a daily base: check out
> CVS, read changes, update docs. That's the only way we can have good
> documentation for every release. Seeing that nobody is capable or willing
> to do it, let's not suddenly make this a big thing. Besides, the include
> function won't change (much), it's just relocated.
>
> The main thing would then be the jsextend file, and leaving the
> private/protected stuff for later (not much later though >:)
>
>
>
> Pascal Bestebroer ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> Software ontwikkelaar
> Oberon Informatiesystemen b.v.
> http://www.oibv.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dynapi-Dev mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dynapi-dev
>
_______________________________________________
Dynapi-Dev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dynapi-dev
