RE: [PHP-GTK] documentation building: tutorials [was: what is going on with gtk.php.net?]
| From: | Steph | Date: | Mon, 19 Jul 2004 18:50:42 +0000 |
| Subject: | RE: [PHP-GTK] documentation building: tutorials [was: what is going on with gtk.php.net?] | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.gtk.general |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-gtk-general+get-4792@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Hi Nathan,
> What i would be happy to see on the site is a better search
> engine (the php.net one is
> good but the gtk.php.net is really poor why isn't it the same?),
- because I'm human too, and once was a newbie facing the (to me) huge job
of making the manual searchable. Still waiting for someone to step up and
volunteer on that front, since we seem to be having a burst of creative
energy on both this and the docs list :)
> some more news regarding php-gtk, cause seeing one news by year
> let user wonder about
> the viability of the project.
> and we don't know anything about the gtk2 bindings, is someone
> work on it or not or
> things like that.
Haven't seen Andrei on line in the last week; I know he's planning to work
on it, just not what his schedule is. And you should be aware that there
were a lot of patches outstanding from PHP 5.0's long 'feature freeze' that
have already gone into CVS in preparation for 5.1; this includes a bunch of
Zend Engine patches, which may or may not directly affect Andrei's plans
depending on their precise nature. The 'plus' side here is that this new
freedom to add features to ZE 2 is also Andrei's freedom - if he needs
something more, he can add it now.
<snip />
> some wiki need to be registered before edit the content and i
> definitively think that
> would be a great things for the wiki and for its users too.
> Bref I'm really happy to see the list so active and hope that our
> community will grow up
> and that we 'll made better tool for US to work.
Nathan - 'community based' means exactly that, and a wiki is the epitome of
a community based project at work. If it gets 'roped off' you end up with a
'them and us' situation, rather like the one we've been facing until now
over the documentation project. A better solution might be to have some
people designate themselves as 'Wiki-cleaners'.
Any takers?