At 09:51 10-09-01, James Moore wrote:
> > Kinda like the FSF assignment. This is so that we can publish these docs
> > in books free of charge, without having to run after everybody who
> > contributed. Don't worry, we don't get a nickel out of it.
>
>I dunno what its under now but the Open Doc
> There is a tree in place, http://www.zend.com/zend/api.php for more
> information... Albeit these docs are way out of date and are very
> rudimentary its just no one with api familiarity, also has the
patience
> to improve them :)
Yes; I have a local copy of those docs.
They are
> Kinda like the FSF assignment. This is so that we can publish these docs
> in books free of charge, without having to run after everybody who
> contributed. Don't worry, we don't get a nickel out of it.
I dunno what its under now but the Open Documentation License is nice as
then main contri
> >
> > Perhaps the php-doc guys can set up the basics (I don't have
> > time to become a doc guru) so that we at least have somewhere
> > to put it, and that might encourage people to write some docs.
> > Also, whenever a new API comes along (like zend_parse_parameters)
> > it could be put in the
At 02:29 10-09-01, Sterling Hughes wrote:
> ;) -- I know they chose the license (you forget, I used to work
> for one of them, and I'm still friends with the other :) The
> license makes sense from the Book's point of view, but as an Open
> Source License it doesn't make sense (es
On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> At 01:28 10-09-01, Sterling Hughes wrote:
> >On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> >
> > > At 00:27 10-09-01, Sterling Hughes wrote:
> > > > Oh yeah, not to mention the license is pretty bad :) I give up all
> > > > rights
> > > > to the ma
At 02:19 10-09-01, Egon Schmid wrote:
>To make it short. You are yourself on the list of authors. Should I
>deprecate you?
If it makes you feel better, sure, go ahead. The only reason I'm there is
because I've written the documentation for the MySQL module, but I realize
it's not too much, and
Zeev Suraski wrote:
>
> At 01:15 10-09-01, Egon Schmid wrote:
> > > Not writing documentation is certainly within your right, but this is a
> > > poor argument for not doing so. Certainly a main reason that people
> > > code from examples and not documentation is when documentation is poor.
> >
At 01:15 10-09-01, Egon Schmid wrote:
> > Not writing documentation is certainly within your right, but this is a
> > poor argument for not doing so. Certainly a main reason that people
> > code from examples and not documentation is when documentation is poor.
>
>Sorry, couldn't resist. The docu
At 01:28 10-09-01, Sterling Hughes wrote:
>On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote:
>
> > At 00:27 10-09-01, Sterling Hughes wrote:
> > > Oh yeah, not to mention the license is pretty bad :) I give up all
> > > rights
> > > to the material that I write (more so than an assignment of right
On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> At 00:59 10-09-01, George Schlossnagle wrote:
> >>The reason I told Jani it had nothing to do with the discussion was that
> >>I think that this is wrong...
> >>The reason I disagree is that a large number of people (today, probably
> >>most) code based
At 00:59 10-09-01, George Schlossnagle wrote:
>>The reason I told Jani it had nothing to do with the discussion was that
>>I think that this is wrong...
>>The reason I disagree is that a large number of people (today, probably
>>most) code based on examples, not on documentation. Nothing forces
On Sun, 9 Sep 2001, Sterling Hughes wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote:
>
> > At 00:27 10-09-01, Sterling Hughes wrote:
> > > Oh yeah, not to mention the license is pretty bad :) I give up all
> > > rights
> > > to the material that I write (more so than an assignment of ri
On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> At 00:27 10-09-01, Sterling Hughes wrote:
> > Oh yeah, not to mention the license is pretty bad :) I give up all
> > rights
> > to the material that I write (more so than an assignment of rights,
> > which is standard for contributors to com
George Schlossnagle wrote:
>
> On Sunday, September 9, 2001, at 05:45 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
>
> > At 00:26 10-09-01, Wez Furlong wrote:
> >> Zeev Suraski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> >> > At 14:44 09-09-01, Jani Taskinen wrote:
> >> > > If ZE was properly documented, people didn't have
On Sunday, September 9, 2001, at 05:45 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> At 00:26 10-09-01, Wez Furlong wrote:
>> Zeev Suraski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
>> > At 14:44 09-09-01, Jani Taskinen wrote:
>> > > If ZE was properly documented, people didn't have to rely on
>> > > only the sources.
>> >
At 00:27 10-09-01, Sterling Hughes wrote:
> Oh yeah, not to mention the license is pretty bad :) I give up all
> rights
> to the material that I write (more so than an assignment of rights,
> which is standard for contributors to commercial texts), and you
> don't even get payed
At 00:26 10-09-01, Wez Furlong wrote:
>Zeev Suraski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > At 14:44 09-09-01, Jani Taskinen wrote:
> > > If ZE was properly documented, people didn't have to rely on
> > > only the sources.
> > By the way, your post had absolutely nothing to do with the
> > subject o
On Sun, 9 Sep 2001, Sterling Hughes wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Sep 2001, Wez Furlong wrote:
>
> > Zeev Suraski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > > At 14:44 09-09-01, Jani Taskinen wrote:
> > > > If ZE was properly documented, people didn't have to rely on
> > > > only the sources.
> > > By the way, y
On Sun, 9 Sep 2001, Wez Furlong wrote:
> Zeev Suraski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > At 14:44 09-09-01, Jani Taskinen wrote:
> > > If ZE was properly documented, people didn't have to rely on
> > > only the sources.
> > By the way, your post had absolutely nothing to do with the
> > subjec
Zeev Suraski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> At 14:44 09-09-01, Jani Taskinen wrote:
> > If ZE was properly documented, people didn't have to rely on
> > only the sources.
> By the way, your post had absolutely nothing to do with the
> subject of the discussion.
I think it does; if there wer
21 matches
Mail list logo
