[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Developer Guide

On Sun, Dec 21, 2003 at 03:44:25AM -0800, Mohammed Elzubeir wrote:
> > 
> > Makefile.cvs: why not use the ./autogen.sh script ?
> > Most of the projects i see use an autogen.sh script. I didn't find the 
> > Makefile.cvs except in Qt apps.
> > and why run make -f Makefile.cvs when i can simply ./autogen.shh ?
> > with a proper autogen.sh you can pass arguments to the "configure" 
> > script. That's one.
> > The second is that writing a proper Makefile.cvs forces the developer to 
> > learn the syntax of Makefiles, That's bad.
> > and with the ./autogen script you can produce meaningfull errors and 
> > instructions on where to get the missing packages from the autotools "I 
> > think this can be done with the Makefile.cvs, but perhaps not that easy 
> > ?"
> > I can't think of more reasons as I'm typing this in a hurry!
> Again, the requirement is to have a Makefile.cvs present. Having an
> autogen.sh boostrap.sh or whatever you would like to call it is entirely
> up to you. 
And why don't we use the autogen.sh ? Most of the projects are using it 

> Learning how to write Makefiles should not be a problem. If you are a
> developer and don't know how to write a Makefile then you have some
> serious problems ;) 
We are not judging the development skills here, And we are not forcing 
the developer to learn new things just because we want to

> > I don't see a reason for the RCS headers ? why is it required ??
> It just is. I can give reasons, but we can argue over it for years to
> come. Consistency, forcing the user to explain what the file does,
> making it easy for others (and the developer) to know what revision he's
> looking at.. are among a few reasons that come to mind.
I don't see these necessary, but it's Ok.

> > doxygen ? I don't think that's required if I'm not writing a library.
> The Doxygen requirement is only there to force commenting the code. The
> comments should be done using the Doxygen style comments.. which are
> fairly easy and flexible. No one is required to use all the features
> that come with Doxygen (they are pretty elaborate). Simply commenting
> each and every function at a minimum.
I have a suggestion here:
I'm using Gtk, I think using gtk-doc 'd be better than doxygen
Another developer is using Qt/Kde, then use their documentation 
Only use doxygenn if No documentation framework is there for the toolkit 
used/or if you are developing a console application.

> > ChangeLog, Comeon guys DON'T complicate things. It's important but I 
> > don't think it's mandatory.
> It is mandatory if you intend to make a release. I don't remember when
> was the last time I grabbed a prgram that did not have a changelog file.
> If there is one that did not have a changelog file, I would not be
> taking it seriously.. since the author would imply that he is not
> tracking its progress and so he is not serious enough.
Does this have to be in the standard ChangeLog format specified by the 
GNU project ??

> > even for stable and odd for development. Are we maintaining such large 
> > projects ?
> > Please leave the versioning system for each project maintainer.
> This is one of the main reasons that prompted the whole developer guide
> to begin with. It most certainly must be made as a rule across all
> projects. A verioning scheme/system must exist. This is irrelevant of
> the size of the project. I most certainly would not back down from my
> position on that. 
for individual projects, i think it doesn't make sence.
but when we are to release togeather, then we can enforce this.

> When I wrote that, I did make a lot of considerations. For example, I
> did not want to break how Katoob was being versioned, so I made it so
> alpha releases hold the dates as a suffix.
and sure the new guidelines'll be followed by me regardless of what i 
think about them ;-)

-- Katoob Main Developer
Linux registered user #224950, ICQ #58475622
Don't send me any attachment in Micro$oft (.DOC, .PPT) format please
Read http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
Preferable attachments: .PDF, .HTML, .TXT
Thanx for adding this text to Your signature
Version: 3.1
GCM/IT d-(++)@ s+(++):->+++ a-- C+++$>++++ UL+++$>++++ P+++$>+++++ 
L+++(++++)$>+++++ E>+++ W++?>$ N+>+++ o? K-? !w++ !O !M !V !PS@ !PE@ Y+ PGP+++ 
t? 5? !X R? tv-- b+@ DI D+ G-- e++>+++ h-->++ !r y? 

Attachment: pgp00004.pgp
Description: PGP signature