[Jython-dev] Re: [Jython-users] Jython documentation

[<bc...@wo...>]

[moving the discussion to jython-dev]

[finn]
> Is the SF DocManager usefull for this?
>
>   http://sourceforge.net/docman/?group_id=12867

[Robert]

>This may be a good start, but it seems unclear what format limitation
>there is on SF.  A limitation to html might not be ideal? 

I tend to agree.

>I'm
>curious what people think about sticking closer to the latex documentation
>Fred Drake details here:
>
>    http://python.sourceforge.net/devel-docs/doc/doc.html

Copying the use of latex from CPython might be a good idea. That way we
get both Fred's documentation on latex use and lots of examples.

>CVS + latex and converting to format-specific output seems a better
>investment. How can you do this on SF? Would this mean a separate
>'project' for documentation where only the html output is committed to the
>jython project?  What are others thoughts?  My cvs+emacs+latex
>bias may be another's bane, so speak up.

Well, latex does seems somewhat old and dusty (just IMHO). The list of
tools also seems quite intimidating. I haven't searched for them yet,
but some look very unix centric. Obviously I will prefer an enviroment
where I too can generate the output files on my win2k. Does the latex
tools also exists on windows?

We may also require some additions to the latex macros. Perhaps
something that can pretty print static and instance java methods.

>It seems a quick consesus may be most useful, so I'll cast my
>inconsequential vote for what seems most likely to allow latex source...
>If authors can have rw to only a /doc subdirectory of Jython's cvs- do
>that.

I don't think that is technically doable (please correct me if anyone
knows how) but it may not be a major problem. If write-access to the CVS
is mis-used it is easily revoked.

If we pick a CVS based route, I think we should add a new CVS module (we
already have "jython" and "htdocs") that contains only the doc sources.

regards,
finn