Re: Documention problems

[Chuck Hagenbuch <chuck@horde.org>] > Quoting Stig Sæther Bakken <ssb@alltheweb.com>: > > > Maybe, but for a long-term solution I think we should re-write the > > documentation tool to cope with how people work, rather than the other > > way around. :-) > > Well, how do people work, then? Like the packages are installed? Or like > they're arranged on the cvs server? The disconnect between the two seems to > complicate a lot of things... I mean how we (PEAR contributors) work. If we organize the CVS module like the install tree, there's no end to all the practical problems we'll start encountering: * everyone wants to have a file in the top-level directory (DB.php, Log.php, Cache.php etc.) * it gets non-trivial to determine which files constitute a package (because a sub-directory might belong to another package, or a directory could be shared between a lot of packages, such as the "root" directory) * it gets non-trivial to implement CVS ACLs, you would basically need both inclusion and exclusion rules * doing "cvs tag" to label a release gets a hassle because you have to avoid tagging the files of other packages in the same part of the tree I could give more examples of how messy a shared tree would be, but I hope this gives you an idea of the grief it would cause. - Stig -- Stig Sæther Bakken <ssb@alltheweb.com> Fast Search & Transfer ASA, Trondheim, Norway