Hi Joe,
Arh documentation don't you just love it:) I agree with everything you said. One thing I would add is a set of improved examples - which should be easy enough to create - I'm sure many of us have lots of useful test scripts.
Perhaps it is time for formal documentation standards? I can't believe I suggested that.
If no one on this list volunteers, and it Aldo and co agree, perhaps it might be an idea to post on the help wanted list on sourceforge?
----- Original Message -----
From: Frazier, Joe Jr
To: perl-win32-gui-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 1:53 PM
Subject: RE: [perl-win32-gui-users] Intermediate release of Win32::GUI

Ditto to many of Jez's comments.  I would be personally very much love to have a monthly build make it to PPM form.  To my understanding, there is really not that much to making a PPM file once the build is put together, so why not.   However, one of the biggest concerns is not with the coding aspect, but with updating the documentation properly.  This is what ends up taking time in most cases and I would expect, is one thing that few do consistently.    In many cases, getting a new feature to work may only take 10-20 minutes of coding(not counting testing and eval time), especially if Aldo or someone else had already started the basic shell of the feature.  However, taking the time to document the control, plus its methods, properties, and events can take several hours, and as you say, some of the developers just need to get it working (I fall victim to this in my own code all the time.  How often have you written some type of  "one off" script and the later had to go back and expand it and realize that what you wrote initially is crap from an extensibility/expandability standpoint?  I know I have many times.   I guess what we really need is someone who is devoted to updating the documentation (and perhaps someone for test cases as well) and make sure that the active developers work with this person.  I personally know I do not have the time, nor am I particularly good at doing this, so that leave me out.   Are there any volunteers?   My expectation is that all documentation must, at the very least, be in pod format.  Any other format (Wiki, etc) is fine also, but pod must be the original format from which other documentation is derived.
My two cents

-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Pick [mailto:Stephen.Pick@uce.ac.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 8:33 AM
To: perl-win32-gui-users@lists.sourceforge.net; Jez White
Subject: RE: [perl-win32-gui-users] Intermediate release of Win32::GUI

Hi Jez,
I agree with most of your points about what goes into the project, but I feel that we're in the best position (as people working on active projects) to know what needs to be added.
To make you extremely happy the commit i'll do thisevening will make progress bars take account of -foreground and -background colour arguments. Rejoice!
-----Original Message-----
From: perl-win32-gui-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net [mailto:perl-win32-gui-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net]On Behalf Of Jez White
Sent: 13 January 2004 12:16
To: Levin; perl-win32-gui-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [perl-win32-gui-users] Intermediate release of Win32::GUI

There have been quite a few additions to the 665-fix build - so perhaps a new build is warranted?
How would people feel if there are regular new builds - say once a month (during active development)? [Laurent, I apologise for a suggestion that would give you more work!].
I've been thinking for a while about the problem of missing methods/functions for various controls. Most of below is just me speaking outloud, and does not offer direct solutions. With a bit of luck it may spark a bit of debate. I apologise in advance if this is just a boring monologue:)
To me the general development process seems quite "selfish"  -  i.e., things go into the build that is required for the individual developers project. Using myself as an example, I needed the AddImageList method for the tab strip control, and with a bit of tinkering and struggle I got it working (It went into the latest build, with Laurent graciously adding other missing tab strip methods). In my view, this process isn't a negative thing, but I can't help wondering if there is a better way of managing and dealing with missing methods/functions. As an example, we had a solution presented for setting the colour of the progress control and ideally this should be added as a method to the core.
I think part of the problem is that most of us on this list (including myself) are using Win32::GUI in an active project, so time and effort is devoted to our own needs and not on gui. So, solutions such as identifying all missing methods/functions, and dishing out the work in a proactive major, can only work if people have the time and inclination to do the work. It would also need someone to own, manage and control that aspect of the development project. I suspect that the hardcore hackers/developers have time constraints and other commitments that would preclude them for getting involved (?).
The only solution I can think of is for more developers to get involved - perhaps some of you reading this list?:) Although, in my view, the key is for someone to manage and own. Anyone fancy the job?:) Perhaps other developers can be brought in through sourceforge (through the "help" wanted feature)?
Thoughts? Comments?
"selfish" jez :)
----- Original Message -----
From: Levin
To: perl-win32-gui-users@lists.sourceforge.net
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 10:50 AM
Subject: [perl-win32-gui-users] Intermediate release of Win32::GUI

If corrections have enabled to put hooks, it's the good reason to make new PPM release of the module ;) Have you such plan?
I had failure of all attempts when compiled a package with corrections from CVS Repository :(