Re: [Cppunit-devel] 1.6.0 is released!

[Baptiste L. <gai...@fr...>]

Quoting "Steve M. Robbins" <ste...@vi...>:

> Salut, B-L,
  Tisba for short ;-). Learning French ?


> On Tue, Sep 25, 2001 at 12:32:21PM +0200, Baptiste Lepilleur wrote:
> > Quoting "Steve M. Robbins" <ste...@vi...>:
> > 
> > [...]
> > > >     HTML format or text, or ... ?
> > > 
> > > Your choice.  HTML has the advantage of hyperlinks, should one so
> > > desire.  I find text quite a bit easier to edit, however, so HTML
> may
> > > put me off editing the FAQ...
> >   So let's start with text. Would XML (with XSL to generate the html)
> be 
> > suitable for you ?
> 
> I wouldn't know what to do with XML, either :-/  
> 
> I usually stay a little back of the "new technology" curve --- that
> way I can avoid travelling down all the dead-ends ;-)

  Well, with the appropriate XSL script (to generate the HTML), we could get 
automatically have a TOC generated from each question. That's what I don't like 
with HTML is that you have to manually maintain the TOC...
  Basicaly, the XML would be a subset of HTML and would be processed into HTML 
(that's heavy tools, but I think it would be quite interesting to do).

> From my point of view, I prefer text.  If we find ourselves wanting
> fancy things, like links, then we can move to straight HTML, or to
> something that can be processed into HTML.  We could use Doxygen,
> for example, as done in doc/other_documentation.dox.  Doxygen has
> an easy way to make lists, I believe.  And it would be *very* easy
> to hyperlink both to and from the CppUnit class documentation, so
> that might be the best option.

  Yes, linking to the doc would be interesting. Can Doxygen generate a TOC ?

[...]
> If you build *in* the source tree, then builddir == srcdir, so
> the Makefile variables are simpler:
> 
> 	top_srcdir   = ..
> 	srcdir       = .
> 	top_builddir = ..

  I'll try to come up with something to generate the doc (sadly, we don't have 
a standard search and replace tools...)

> >   How do we go reporting fix into the 1.8.0 branch ?
> 
> Well, since there is no branch done yet, everything on the "main"
> trunk will appear in both the 1.6.1 and 1.8.0 release.  So please
> do commit bugfixes onto the CVS tree.
> 
> Once a branch is made, then the procedure is: checkout the 1.6 branch,
> make the change, commit it.  Then check out the main branch and merge
> in the change just made on the 1.6 branch.  This is a mildly more
> difficult procedure, so I am delaying making a 1.6 branch in order
> that we can continue to use the simpler procedure.  
> 
> We can delay a 1.6 branch until we need to make 1.8-only changes to
> CVS.  I thought we'd give it a week or so, until the bugfixes die
> down.  What do you think?

  Well, I already have some features (CPPUNIT_TEST_EXCEPTION) I would like to 
add (I would target 1.8.0 for the end of next week. Expected exception and 
named suite registration only would be worth it).

  How about: 
  - continue reporting bug fix to branch 1.6
  - add feature to branch 1.8

  - each time a release of branch 1.6 is made, merge the change since the last 
release on the branch ?
  or
  - merge change that occured on branch 1.6 since branch 1.8 creation to branch 
1.8 ?

  => instead of merging each time we update 1.6, we do it only once per bug fix 
release (or we could even postpone until 1.8 release to integrate bugfix)

  Baptiste.

---
Baptiste Lepilleur <gai...@fr...>
http://gaiacrtn.free.fr/index.html
Language: English, French