revive autogenerated developer documentation to auto-publish it at doc.o... #5
Conversation
|
Nope, I don't want autogenerated docs. |
|
How does it hurt? It is a configuration file and it is not even done on "make" (you have to explicitly call make doc), |
|
The commit was not just a configuration file. Plus, I don't want a doxygen dependency. Plus, I don't want the documentation mixed into the source code. |
|
It is not a dependency for the package and not a dependency for building it, only a dependency for "make doc". The commit was the configuration file plus the only existing documentation for the format, how the solver works, etc. Pages that were inserted in the generated website, and a good place to document stuff and add tutorials and guides. It is interesting to know that you don't want documentation in the source, because there was never any. But it was comfortable for developers to explore the API with the generated html. |
|
I agree with Duncan, documentation is really important for developers approaching to libsolv. Please reconsider your initial decision. |
|
Uh, who said that I don't like documentation. It's just that the old docu was completely outdated, so I scraped it. I'm also not a fan of doxygen, I'm more an old school roff user (i.e. unix manpages). |
|
@mlschroe so there's no up-to-date documentation, right? :( |
|
Well, yes. And there's never been such a thing both for libsolv and libsatsolver. |
During the libsolv transition the docs were not available and therefore not autogenerated on every commit on our Jenkins server.