> There was quite some discussion on creating a central build system for > the documentation projects, and livedocs will be a move towards this > direction, since it should be developed with portability in mind
I inherited a lot of non-standard xml, as you know. We also have the problem that php-gtk-doc describes a hierarchy of objects rather than a list of functions - I'm keeping one eye on phpdoc to know how you resolve the issues that arise from describing objects in PHP5, since it is the direct cause of most of our non-standard areas. I still haven't seen a version of livedocs that works out of the box here, and won't transfer across until that happens. Currently I have to rewrite large chunks of it to make it usable - and this is _after_ making several changes to the xml structure we originally had. I only just found out there was a bug reporting mechanism in place for it; there wasn't a public announcement of this, or if there was I missed it. The last bug report updates were apparently made on August 4th. I have severe reservations about relying on software with so little testing; no reflection on Wez and Derick's abilities intended, but I think this needs to be a more public project with a greater level of accountability before we can start to consider it robust. (even > for non PHP.net projects to utilize). That would replace many of the > configure options and make targets of phpdoc (as well as php-gtk-doc and > peardoc in case those teams will utilize livedocs too). That would > greatly simplify things... Agreed. But again, the build system we have in place provably works, and it will take a lot of testing before I'm happy to move on to something as yet unproven. > I am looking at the build system from the ease-of-use perspective. If > you only need to checkout the CVS module and can directly run the PHP > script, it is much easier then installing cygwin, getting familiar with > the command line, and put all the tools on the appropriate paths... Hm, the only tool we need to add manually here is PHP actually :) I haven't tried to build livedocs outside a Cygwin environment either, although the unix tools needed for that are (I believe) all available for download as win32 native executables. > Since livedocs will hopefully make most of the current make targets > obsolote, the build system will be much smaller, and easier to port to > another environment (eg. Phing). Again, too new to be considered as production standard IMHO. I still think the 'wait and see' approach is more justifiable. > > Goba >
