On May 8, 2007, at 11:44 PM, Russell Sharp wrote: > As far as the website goes, the real problem is that there are errors > and incomplete references in the documentation.
If you discover these, please file an STR and we will solve them as soon as possible. The "Documentation" section is only updated a releases though, and the current 1.1.8 release has 11 documentation fixes and a whole new section for threads. > You could give out svn > accounts with access only to the docs. Is this already available? > That > would allow regular users to contribute and only require the devs to > review it every other week or so. In FLTK1, ocumentation is written separately, but it is part of the source code SVN. If you have suggestions for changes, you can post them as an STR and we will review and likely include them. If you made a few good contributions, you can apply for SVN access and modify the docs yourself. The same is tru for the website itself. In FLTK2, the documentation is integral part of the source code and must adhere to a strict coding. Nevertheless, the same policies as above are applied. > In my experience, a wiki is better as it has namespaces and several > other features that makes doc generation very efficient. Yes, we have discussed that and quite a number of people would like a wiki. We have not found anyone yet who is willing to maintain the wiki, throw out the junk entries, do the backups, maintain the server, etc. yet. Mike, who is running fltk.org is not interested in a wiki. He does allow SVN access to the entire site though, and also points out that you can add a comment on most pages, which is not quite a wiki, but does allow interaction. > However, it's > been voiced that some don't like the wiki and it takes a lil more > effort > to convert it into an offline format. I have tried to convert wikis into documentation automatically, but failed. It is a painful process, unless in the mean time, a smart person wrote a Wiki-to-documentation exporter. That would be really nice. > You should give it serious > consideration. We do. We love to have as many people as possible contribute to FLTK to make it grow and be bug free and complete. Unfortunatly, there is rarely the time to improve the web site, or to use the most recent tools and scripts. fltk.org has the advantage to us, the developers, that it is simple, fast, and works. It must have been years since fltk.org was down the last time. This gives us the time to concentrate on the main issue, the library. > Just because toolkits in general have bad documentation doesn't mean > fltk should go with the status quo. Please let us know what exactly we can improve. Please send us corrections, additional text, or even tutorial. If they are useful, we will add them to the code base. > Keep up the good work, Thanks, Matthias ---- http://robowerk.com/ _______________________________________________ fltk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk
