On Tue, Jan 01, 2002 at 04:05:18PM +0100, Martin Jansen wrote: > On 31 Dec 2001 19:18:59 -0000, Jim Winstead wrote: > >Jon Parise <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Are there any well-founded objections to this (either in practice > >> or principle)? > > > >no objections, but one thing that should be considered is what happens > >to the documentation for these extensions > > The documentation of the extensions can be easily merged in the > peardoc repository. Right now there is no automated build for > the manual, but you promised to help us with that in 2002, no? :-)
yes, yes, i'll get to it. but i don't see how moving the documentation from the phpdoc repository to the peardoc repository improves the situation at all. (in fact, it will make it slightly worse. the pear website is not mirrored, and i don't think it is even mirrorable.) i was thinking more along the lines of something that allowed the documentation for an extension to be managed on its own, just like we're allowing the extension itself to be. and then some additional mechanism that allows the documentation for extensions to be plugged into the main documentation. jim -- PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
