Menu
▾
▴
RE: [Pyogclib-developers] Releasing pyogclib
|
From: <Jea...@CC...> - 2003-10-03 21:48:40
|
Sean, OK I've added and committed as many doctsrings as I'm going to for the time being, so you can run epydoc on the CVS contents and something much better should come out. Ah, a Mac user :) I didn't know OO 1.0 had DocBook support ... I thought it was new in 1.1 ... Can't speak as to how good or bad it is though, I have it at home, I'll give it a try! I 'm going to have to disgaree on the web site thing :) It's really got nothing to do with the code base people want, also it adds to the size of the download. And you never know, if this things starts getting a following, the website could grow enough that it'll have a negative impact on the download ... It also may have contents you don't want just anybody to download as well. Better move it now than later ? Let me know how things go with the file release, or if you need any help with anything ! Have a good week-end, J.F. -----Original Message----- From: Sean Gillies [mailto:sgi...@fr...] Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 5:27 PM To: Jea...@cc... Cc: pyo...@li... Subject: Re: [Pyogclib-developers] Releasing pyogclib Now that you mention it, the epydocs aren't so useful unless they are on a server, so let's not distribute them except through the website. And let's don't worry about nightly epydocs. IMO people who are using CVS can use pydoc to see the package/module/class structure of the library and can read the source directly. I've heard poor reviews of OpenOffice's DocBook support, maybe it's improved in 1.1? That'd be great. All it needs now is to run in Darwin without X :) I think it's OK for the web site to be in the CVS, we'll be sure to exclude it from the releases when we make the tarball. I will use the sourceforge file release and then for the next one, maybe we can get together on IRC and I can show you through it. Sean On Thursday, October 2, 2003, at 03:09 PM, Jea...@cc... wrote: > Sean, > > You mean in order to include epydoc in the release itself ? > > I don't know you have more experience with sourceforge than I do. I > know > they have a File Release process mechanism ... Is it worth using ? If > so, > I'd suggest we put the epydoc pages in the CVS and make it part of > what we > want released. Would it be possible to maintain epydoc's for each > release > versions in the CVS, both for the purposes of publishing to our > website AND > including in a file release ? that would be ideal, would it not ? > > The only problem would be generating epydocs for the CVS/Development > version. As you mentionned, SF doesn't have epydoc on their server. > We have > a few options ... I have reliable servers here at work. I could make a > job > that downloads the CVS version, generates the epydocs and posts it > back up, > say every night or something like that ... ? That way any user > interested in > the CVS version of the code would get API docs current to last night. > > As far as DocBook goes, I'm not really thinking about that just yet, > and > definitely not for this release. I'd like to get a decent README done > first > :) > I use DocBook straight from XML Spy on my workstation, and apparently > OpenOffice 1.1 can export docbook, so that might be fun to try out. > Thought > this means I don't realy on python or any server-side stuff to > generate my > docbook, or the HTML transformation results. > > On a side note, currently the www site is in the PyOGCLib cvs > directory, > which means that people that checkout the source get the website ... > Maybe > it should be moved into our CVSROOT to avoid this ? > > J.F. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sean Gillies [mailto:sgi...@fr...] > Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 3:35 PM > To: Jea...@cc... > Cc: pyo...@li... > Subject: Re: [Pyogclib-developers] Releasing pyogclib > > > Monday sounds good to me. I'll move the web page and over the weekend > will > make a build script that will run epydoc and convert future DocBook > docs to > HTML. > > Since sourceforge hasn't epydoc, how about if I make the release > tarball on > my machine and then upload it to the sourceforge site? I've got the > tools > to process DocBook as well, using the Ft.Xml.Xlst module from 4thought. > > Sean > > On Thursday, October 2, 2003, at 09:41 AM, > Jea...@cc... wrote: > >> Sean, >> >> Agreed, we should release something, and 0.1 sounds like a good place >> to >> start :) ! >> >> I've started adding a variety of doc strings in my code, just haven't >> commited any of it yet, once that's done, I'll be ok with a first >> release. >> >> Hopefully that will happen before the end of the week. >> >> I'm already on a feature freeze for WFSClient anyways ... And I agree >> that >> for now the API docs should be ok. We should just adjust the website >> so >> that it work as expected (i.e. the home page is indeed the home page, >> instead of under foo/ ). >> >> How does next monday sound for a release ? that way if I can't find >> time to >> do it at work I'll have the week-end to catch up. >> >> J.F. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Sean Gillies [mailto:sgi...@fr...] >> Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 10:30 AM >> To: pyo...@li... >> Subject: [Pyogclib-developers] Releasing pyogclib >> >> >> Let's make a first release of the library. >> >> The WMSClient module is ready to go. Jan has said that he's already >> used it, and I'd like to release new versions of other software that >> would use the library. >> >> The WMSServer module remains in a state that is really only useful >> with MapServer, but I think that we shouldn't let this hold up a >> release. If we call this 0.1, I think I'd rather wait till 0.2 to >> have a more generally useful WMSServer. My plan for that is to have >> a small set of classes that would allow a WMS Server to be easily >> constructed from something as basic as Python's cgi library + GDAL. >> This will take some time. >> >> J.F., I know that you wanted to write some user docs before a first >> release, but how about for now we focus on documentation in the code >> and keep the user docs very simple? I have picked up the DocBook >> distribution. Since you're using 4.1.2 with MapServer, would you >> prefer to stay with that? Any reason to go to 4.2? >> >> Can we set a date for a code freeze and then a date for release? >> >> Sean >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek >> Welcome to geek heaven. >> http://thinkgeek.com/sf >> _______________________________________________ >> Pyogclib-developers mailing list >> Pyo...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pyogclib-developers >> > |
