Re: [igraph] miscellaneous from a newbie, docs and interfacing

[Gábor Csárdi]

On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 1:52 PM, Marco Maggi <address@hidden> wrote:
> "Gábor Csárdi" wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 7:57 AM, Marco Maggi <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> Actually  I am  thinking  about  adding a  revised IGraph
>>> doc  file to my Texinfo advocacy  project[1]
>>
>> I understand the benefit of this for projects that have no
>> info  (or html,  or pdf)  documentation, but  we  have all
>> these. It  is true that  the quality of  our documentation
>> could be improved,  but probably the best way  to go then,
>> is  to  improve it  and  store  within  the igaph  project
>> itself.
>
> I understand the benefits  of a customised infrastructure (I
> have  one myself!),  but  I see  problems  in improving  the
> quality  of  the  docs  while  keeping it  in  the  sources.
> Anyway, if  I succeed in  doing it everyone can  judge, from
> the quality of  the output, what the best way  to go is; the
> copyright of  the revised document would be  fully yours, so
> it  could be  included in  IGraph as  a  traditional Texinfo
> source.

Marco, it is not about the copyright, I don't care much about that. It
is about maintaining it afterwards. If we end up with two versions of
the documentation, then it is 99% that we will only update the one
that comes from the source files and the texinfo one gets outdated
immediately.

What are the problems with having the docs in the source files? As we
have custom code that extracts it and converts it to DocBook, we can
define new tags, markup, etc.

Gabor

> --
> Marco Maggi
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> igraph-help mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/igraph-help
>



-- 
Gabor Csardi <address@hidden>     UNIL DGM