Hi Sean, Currently the way of getting changes commited to the 'livedocs' in CVS is to submit patches to those who have karma. When submitting patches, remeber to do 'cvs diff -u' and save this patch to your website and mail them the link and explain to them what you are trying to do with the patch. Certain patches will not be commited and sometimes they will only after the commiter has changed the code slightly for coding standards or for some performance issues, etc.
Regards --jm On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 10:59:51 -0400, Sean Coates <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > [This is a follow-up post to my previous post, "Livedocs woes".] > > What is the current status of livedocs development? > > My understanding is that anyone with phpdoc karma, also, once, had > livedocs karma. A commit was made that some maintainers did not like, > and karma was removed, and only granted to certain people (Currently: > iliaa,goba,wez,derick,sfox,alan_k). Please correct me if I am wrong. > > There are several outstanding issues with the livedocs code. As I said > in my post, last night, HEAD seems broken. Also, Nuno has a number of > patches available at http://livedocs.aborla.net/ > > My point? I'd like to determine the proper procedure for patching > (getting patches approved for) livedocs, or find an alternative > development method. > > I realize that livedocs is not ready for production, as it is intended. > It is, however VERY useful for doc team members (see Philip's posts re: > CHANGELOG and the EXIF changes he made for a practical example). > > I also understand that the original authors of livedocs don't want their > code messed with. Isn't this the beauty of CVS, though? > > I suspect this idea won't be well-received, but if we're not > willing/able to keep livedocs HEAD up to date, could we not branch the > module for testing purposes? Karma could be re-granted on a per-case > basis, with the condition that non-core developers do not commit to > HEAD, but to the dev branch. My understanding of the "staleness" of > livedocs is that Ilia and Wez are busy on PHP 5. I understand this. > People like Nuno, though, have demonstrated a knowledge of livedocs > code, and should be able to contribute, IMHO. I'd also like to see > livedocs tagged regularly so we can easily "rollback" to a previous > version (last night, while getting livedocs running, and failing > miserably, I was tempted to start pulling random dates out for cvs up -D ). > > I'm not trying to point fingers, here, I'd just like to see livedocs > move forward. Can we find a way to make this happen? > > <can type="worms" state="open" /> > > S > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iD8DBQFBHijnWppknrQMxQIRAtiKAKCCWFtGKzlPxyn4Y3pMydqMVvCT0gCfXQsJ > YihNZTBf+dl39Ch7BAODaNc= > =UqpZ > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > -- Jacques Marneweck http://www.powertrip.co.za/blog/
