From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23577 invoked by alias); 11 Jul 2007 21:00:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 23568 invoked by uid 22791); 11 Jul 2007 21:00:58 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from ns.intrepid.com (HELO mail.intrepid.com) (74.95.8.113) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 11 Jul 2007 21:00:55 +0000 Received: from DELORIAN ([10.10.10.10]) by mail.intrepid.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l6BL0jM6015859; Wed, 11 Jul 2007 14:00:45 -0700 From: "Gary Funck" To: Cc: , "'Jim Blandy'" , "'Paul Koning'" Subject: RE: GDB in C++ Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 21:00:00 -0000 Message-ID: <00cd01c7c3fe$94f87990$0a0a0a0a@DELORIAN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-07/txt/msg00100.txt.bz2 > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Blandy > Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 1:41 PM [...] > > We have a GDB wiki: http://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/ > > I wouldn't object to moving the internals documentation there. > High-level organization is pretty key to effective documentation, > though, so the wiki would need aggressive gardening. It would > probably be good for it to have an appointed editor, to avoid ending > up with two or three competing theories for the overall organization. If the GDB internals document were maintained as part of the GDB source tree, then presumably each version of that document will closely track the state of the source tree that it is part of. If the GDB internals document is maintained in the GDB WIKI then it likely tracks the state of the trunk of the development source tree. There are pros/cons to both approaches. What are the advantages of moving the internal documentation to the WIKI? Is there an idea that by being in WIKI format that developers (even casual developers) will be more likely contribute to the internal documentation, rather than marking up the internal document as it currently exists? I notice that the WIKI http://sourceware.org/gdb/wiki/ doesn't appear to have a discussion page (ala Wikipedia). I think there may be value in such a thing, because developers and users can discuss internals documentation issues before committing to updating the document. Thus, some internals info. can be made available before the time is taken to rework that information into prose. In my opinion, it likely isn't the current format of the internals documentation that is holding back further development of that documentation, but I would be interested in hearing counter-opinions. - Gary