On 27.12.2010, at 17:40, Albrecht Schlosser wrote:
> On 27.12.2010 16:38, Matthias Melcher wrote:
>
>> composing the FLTK 1.3 archive I saw that it doubled in size, because we
>> include the PDF documentation. Should we keep it that way? It's kind of
>> bulky, but the docs are right there for the developers... .
>
> ;-) First of all, it should be up-to-date.
> Shall I update it, an shall we package rc2 ? ;-)
Well, I knew that not everything would be 100% for RC1, so if you'd please
repack and commit it?
> Honestly: I never liked the big PDF file in the distribution and in
> subversion, but I think we need it until we find another proper
> solution.
Agreed.
> My idea: if we could provide a 'parallel' documentation package, as
> some Linux and other distros with different source, binary, and
> documentation packages, then I vote +99 for this solution.
>
> We would need a way to upload the documentation file(s), and they must
> be integrated in the download area. The reason is that they must have
> the same version as the sources. If we could manage this, then I
> suggest that we package the generated HTML docs as well, maybe
> in the same fltk-1.3.x-doc.{zip|tar.gz|tar.bz2) file.
That should be possible even without changing the php's. Do we need to provide
three different compression methods, or can we limit this to a single one? I
think that by now, every platform supports .zip, even for the hard-core open
source addicts.
> Oh, and we should be able to generate the website docs on the server,
> so that we don't need to put the doxygen'erated html files in svn. ;-)
That would be nice. Mike?
- Matthias
_______________________________________________
fltk-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
