I do agree that the proposal was quite heavy for 3 months :) well mitsuhiko said it was "doable" in the time frame stated...
Actually the proposal was almost accepted but I worked on another project during the GSoC, so this one got kind of neglected. It had actually undergone 'public review' by a few pocoo fellows and they seemed to like the idea (my initial idea was also to integrate doxygen). But opinions change. [Slightly-out-of-topic GSoC stuff below] "Organizations can push proposals without a candidate". In the strictest definition that's incorrect since only students can push proposals, not the orgs, but it is perfectly fine to base ideas from existing proposals or get them from the community. Also almost all students worth its salt will publish their proposal for the world to see. It builds feedback and tells the world that you're working on that idea :) That being said, there are incidents of idea hijacking (also proposal hijacking?), but the org should know who the original perpetrator is (and the original proposal is likely to be the best among the other me-too proposals). Also please don't worry so much about the deadline... they have not even announced the list of participating organizations yet! I started writing this proposal only after the list had been published. Also IRC helps since some of the big guns appear to be more attentive to IRC than this mailing list ;) -------- Leontius Adhika Pradhana (Leon) http://leapon.net/ On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 2:26 AM, daspostloch <daspostl...@googlemail.com>wrote: > Leon, > > thanks for your answer and all the information. > Your proposals sounds very interesting, although > quite heavy for 3 months. > > I guess we have to acknowledge that there are > cascading scenarios, starting from linking to > doxygen, replacing doxygen's html output, and > replacing doxygen. While the last, your, approach > is the most thourough, it implies quite some > effort. And we overall have the case that > people who basically want the same thing will > split up in 3 factions with different targets, > making it hard to get something to happen. I > think this is the main hurdle here and might > lead to the fact, that despite the overall need > for a bridge, there just will not be enough > momentum for either of the two heavier variants. > Sometimes, it just is like this. > > Did you get some feedback on it in 2010 or did > they just decline? Maybe it would be a good basis > for a reworked proposal (IIRC, also organizations > can push proposals without a candidate?). The > deadline for 2011 is very soon and as I learnt > the hard way several times, it sometimes is better > to not hassle something on your cost. So maybe > the way to go would be to keep talking to the > communities, find strong mentoring organizations, > maybe even student candidates over the year, and > then file something really strong (and on time :) > in 2012... > > Cheers to all, > Paul > > > > On 02/17/2011 06:37 PM, Leontius Adhika Pradhana wrote: > >> Hi Paul, >> >> You might want to take a look at my proposal for last year GSoC which >> attempted to provide the same functionality: >> >> http://leapon.net/files/Multiple%20language%20support%20for%20autodoc%20in%20Sphinx%20via%20ANTLR.html >> (since >> it's from one year ago, excuse me for broken links and outdated >> information). >> >> Also Michael the creator of Breathe< >> http://github.com/michaeljones/breathe> >> emailed me before about the proposal just out of curiosity, and this is my >> reply: >> >> Hi Michael, >> Sorry but the proposal remained a proposal and has not been implemented :( >> I >> don't have plans to do it in the near future either (too busy with >> school). >> I've skimmed the docs for Breathe and it seems to be a very nice concept! >> This is actually quite similar to the project that I wanted to work on the >> first time. However after discussing at #pocoo, some were not very keen of >> the idea of using doxygen because doxygen itself is "not good enough" a >> software overall. A real parser like ANTLR-generated ones are definitely >> better but implementation would definitely be more difficult since it's >> lower level. Some after suggested using clang (a production-ready >> parser-compiler for C-like languages). >> In any case, you project is better because you have an implementation >> instead of just a plan :) Nevertheless you are welcome to >> retrofit/modify/implement the project plan! >> >> Then his reply (pardon me for posting this without permission, I hope you >> don't mind Michael!): >> >> Hey, thanks for the information. You're right, there is something less >> >>> than desirable about Doxygen, but as you say, it lets you ship >>> something quicker so I decided to role with that. I aimed to improve >>> the parser at some point, but really doxygen already does a bunch of >>> languages and I mainly use C++ and that is meant to be horrible to >>> parse, so I took to lazy route. [...] >>> >> >> >> >> -------- >> Leontius Adhika Pradhana (Leon) >> http://leapon.net/ >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 10:17 PM, daspostloch<daspostl...@googlemail.com >> >wrote: >> >> Hi all, >>> >>> Having installed Sphinx only some days ago, I quickly >>> had a look into the Doxygen/XML bridge Breathe [1] >>> written by Micheal Jones. I found the idea very neat. >>> >>> Sphinx has become one of the de-facto standards for >>> python documentation, and it seems plausible that it >>> would have major impact on, e.g., the C++ world as well, >>> provided that the technology is available. However, >>> Micheal has said in a post that he plans to start >>> ceasing further Breathe development. >>> >>> Having noted this, I wanted to ask if there are any >>> Sphinx plans for the 2011 Google Summer of Code, and >>> if so, maybe suggest to check if some Breathe targets >>> could be included before the fast approaching deadline? >>> >>> If yes, this important bridge to other programming >>> languages could be fostered further. As a side note, >>> I have also been pointed to the doxylink project [2], >>> which seems to be a good intermediate workaround. Or >>> does the Sphinx community feel this way of linking to >>> a third system would be the desired solution permanently? >>> >>> Cheers, Paul >>> >>> >>> [1] http://michaeljones.github.com/breathe/ >>> [2] http://packages.python.org/sphinxcontrib-doxylink/index.html >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "sphinx-dev" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to sphinx-dev@googlegroups.com. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> sphinx-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/sphinx-dev?hl=en. >>> >>> >>> >> > -- > "It's zero-zum. Who's on the other side? Who's the idiot?" > "Dusseldorf. Stupid Germans. They > take rating agencies serious. They believe in the rules." > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sphinx-dev" group. > To post to this group, send email to sphinx-dev@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > sphinx-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/sphinx-dev?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sphinx-dev" group. To post to this group, send email to sphinx-dev@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sphinx-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sphinx-dev?hl=en.
