>> Is DrDoc on SqueakSource? I'll take a look. > > Yes I would be more than happy if someone could take the lead there. > I could embed images (UML diagram).
It could maybe be used with Mondrian :-) Alexandre > > > >> >> - Brian >> >> >> >>> >>> Stef >>> >>>>> So far we should invent it. >>>>> And I totally agree with you. If people do not see the good doc >>>>> they >>>>> will not write good comment. >>>>> I started to work on DrDoc a kind of package meta data to add >>>>> documentation to a package but it got stole >>>>> I should push that again. What would be nice is to take one >>>>> package >>>>> and do it well as an example. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It think it should be possible to write documentation at the >>>>> package level. So developpers have a place where they can write an >>>>> overview of their package. When we click on a package, >>>>> documentation should be displayed by default or easily. >>>> >>>> Yes! Here is a post I made in April of 2003: >>>> >>>> >>>>> The biggest frustration with using comments is that there is no >>>>> good >>>>> "starting place" for a given class category. For example, go >>>>> browse >>>>> the Seaside classes and categories and figure out where one should >>>>> start. You can repeat this exercise for any number of >>>>> categories. I >>>>> propose that we we add a documentation attribute to the >>>>> PackageInfo >>>>> stuff, so there is a category level documentation spot, with links >>>> to >>>>> the appropriate class comments. >>>> >>>>> Any thoughts? >>>> I didn't get any response, and I sent a similar type of thought to >>>> Stef recently, but he's so busy I don't even know if he read my >>>> email :) >>>> >>>> - Brian >>>>> >>>>> In the rubygems world, it is a common practice to write >>>>> documentation in a README file which is displayed by RDoc on >>>>> startup page (github works the same way). It seems to me that >>>>> there's the same level of comment between Ruby class/methods and >>>>> Pharo. The documentation at the package level may be the >>>>> difference. >>>>> >>>>> Python has a real documentation effort.Each release come with its >>>>> up to date documentation. It's a release criteria. Python shares >>>>> some similarities with Pharo as they both have "batteries >>>>> included". May be there should have a process to contribute to a >>>>> centralized Pharo documentation which can be accessed within the >>>>> IDE. >>>>> >>>>> Laurent. >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo- >>>>> project >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
