RE: [PHP-DOC] Re: PHP DOC BUILDS -- PLEASE READ

> -----Original Message----- > From: Gabor Hojtsy [mailto:gabor@hojtsy.hu] > Sent: 19 April 2003 16:59 > To: James Cox; phpdoc@lists.php.net > Subject: Re: [PHP-DOC] Re: PHP DOC BUILDS -- PLEASE READ > > > > ok, that's real nice, but make html hasn't been > > a problem. It's `make > > phpweb` that bothers me: > > >>> starting build at: Fri Apr 18 18:58:11 PDT 2003 > > >>> making work directory ... > > <snip> > > >>> finished build at: Sat Apr 19 03:08:59 PDT 2003 > > >>> success! > > > > it took roughly 8 hours to build the phpweb manual with > openjade. As i was > > monitoring it, openjade occupied roughly 98% cpu, and the cpu is about > > 1.2MHz. So we're talking about alot of cycles here. How does make html > > differ from make phpweb to increase the build time so much? > > The only substantial difference is thet it needs to find out what > chunks are > it's siblings to build up a menu at the left side of the screen. That is > probably what takes more time. The XSLT stuff also got better, after the > chunking was rewritten from the ground up, so these types of links can be > easily found. heh. well, that's a pretty big difference :) > > > How soon till we can drop your xsl stuff in place for make phpweb? > > It was created by Thomas, so I don't know really. I don't have > the time to > play with the phpweb stuff right now, you may get much more info > by trying to > build it. There is no direct support for phpweb_xsl building > right now. I'll > add some simple hooks now to let it be built easily. But I don't have an > rsynced php.net site, so I cannot drop in the generated PHP files > to see if > they work or not... > ok. this has given me an idea... i'm going to add it on my TODO to create the ability to 'stage' changes to phpweb etc. This would reduce any little buglets (ie, parse errors :)) that takes the site offline to zero, and allow us to test out new stuff like this... basically when checkins happen, they go through staging so they can be tested, and then from there they get turned into the real rsynced tree... this would be pretty easy to do. -- james