Hi guys!
I've juest committed two new fundamentals pages regarding Expressions and
Functions.
I'm not a native English speaker, and I don't feel my English is good enough
to write documentation. Can someone take a look at the files and fix
grammar/spelling errors?
Jarek
- Original Message -
From: Jaroslaw Kowalski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: ! nant [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, January 02, 2004 6:07 PM
Subject: [nant-dev] Documentation for Expressions and Functions
Hi guys!
I've juest committed two new fundamentals pages regarding Expressions
more documentation = good... holes in docuementation = !good
I like good. Anyone want to volunteer? ;)
quote who=Martin Aliger
Hi all,
I notice that our current docs do not say anything about nant.exe.config. I
this there should be section about it discussing frameworks settings,
Hi all,
I notice that our current docs do not say anything about nant.exe.config. I
this there should be section about it discussing frameworks settings,
possibility to add global properties, and logger.
What do you think? [sorry I do not write it right now...]
Martin
I found more spots where doc leaks:
1/ FileSet.
includes comma-separated list of patterns of files that must be
included; all files are included when omitted.
really? I want to use it and my hardly build comma-separated list throws:
Error creating file set. ---
You should post a patch to this list. read up on cvs diff, use the -u
option for readibility. Your contribution is welcome.
Ian
I made a pass
through all of them, correcting spelling mistakes and
adding content here and there using my tool of choice
(which happens to be Dreamweaver, but could
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] documentation error
I'm happy to contribute as much as I can to docs; I've
synched everything up with CVS and I'll start looking
at them tonight. With your permission, one of things
I'd like to start thinking about is a short
introductory blurb/doc that introduces
--- Scott Hernandez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Right now the Task References are created by NDoc
via the userdoc target.
The product of this process doesn't seem to be getting
checked in. The net result is, when you check out the
docs from CVS, the core part of the documentation (the
tasks
It should not be checked in. Once it is generated, it is stale and it is not
the source of documentation anyway.
Why do you want it checked into source control as html? (it should not be
edited in that form)
- Original Message -
From: Jeffrey McManus [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday,
I understand that it shouldn't be edited directly, but
I think it should at least be checked in, because it
represents part of the distributable package of the
application. One objective of source code is to be
able to view, at a glance, the state of an application
(including its distributable
McManus [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Scott Hernandez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 4:41 PM
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] documentation error
I understand that it shouldn't be edited directly, but
I think it should at least be checked in, because it
represents part
--- Scott Hernandez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The source in cvs does represent the documentation
at any point, not the
other way around. What your suggesting would lead to
ever more dissimilarity
between a build and the docs in the system. We would
need to check in new
docs whenever a source
Maybe working backwards from my original problem would
shed light on this. Let's take an example...right now
in the nightly builds there is support for a tag
called 'nunit2'. How would someone get access to
documentation on this?
The correct answer is:
Do a point release, already. The current
Jeffrey McManus wrote:
I'm accustomed to thinking of docs as a part of the
deliverable package and as such, something that should
be checked in. I'm willing to accept that not
everybody does it that way, though.
Having docs checked in makes sense if they are edited as html. Ours are
Having docs checked in makes sense if they are
edited as html. Ours are
generated. We should be updating the website
regularly with the latest
docs. Perhaps the nightlies should include this too.
Updating the website with documentation on features
that aren't in the latest stable build
in
the day. :) I just haven't gotten it done.
- Original Message -
From: Jeffrey McManus [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Ian MacLean [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Scott Hernandez [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2003 6:29 PM
Subject: Re: [nant-dev] documentation error
Having docs
--- Scott Hernandez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh. It sounds so simple, but this lever of
automation we do not have. It
would require cvs polling, or a linux build
environment on sourceforge.net.
Yep, I didn't mean it seriously -- hence the smiley
after the suggestion. (Although...I'm not super
There's an HTML error at the bottom of the page
describing the 'nunit' task
(http://nant.sourceforge.net/help/tasks/nunittask.html).
This error occurs in both IE 6.0 and Mozilla
(Phoenix). It looks like the page wants to document an
attribute of the nunit task, but it got munged
somehow? Anyway.
explanation, I can help out, or someone on the list
will be able to fill in the details.
Thanks,
Scott
- Original Message -
From: Jeffrey McManus [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 10:57 AM
Subject: [nant-dev] documentation error
There's an HTML error
I'm happy to contribute as much as I can to docs; I've
synched everything up with CVS and I'll start looking
at them tonight. With your permission, one of things
I'd like to start thinking about is a short
introductory blurb/doc that introduces the concept of
a build tool at a high level for
20 matches
Mail list logo
