On 16. mai 2011, at 19:58, Kristian Ølgaard <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 16 May 2011 14:33, Marie E. Rognes <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On 16. mai 2011, at 14:17, Kristian Ølgaard <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 16 May 2011 13:49, Marie E. Rognes <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 16. mai 2011, at 12:13, "Garth N. Wells" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I suggest now would be a good point to make new releases of UFL, FFC and >>>>> DOLFIN. There have been a number of improvements to UFL, FFC caching, >>>>> and there have been a good number of DOLFIN bugs fixes. New version >>>>> numbers would be: >>>>> >>>>> UFL: 0.9.1 >>>>> FFC: 0.9.1 >>>>> DOLFIN: 0.9.12 >>>>> >>>>> Jump in quick if there is anything that you would like do before a >>>>> release. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I have one thing relating to the documentation, and the demo documentation >>>> in particular. >>>> >>>> In order to more easily keep the demo documentation in sync with the >>>> demos, I think we should move the .rst files from the separate fenics-doc >>>> repo to the corresponding dolfin demo directories. Any objections? >>> >>> Yes, the whole point of fenics-docs was to collect the documentation >>> in one place, thus separating the documentation from the packages >>> containing the code. >>> >> >> I understand that point, but I don't see it working that well. > > I was more objecting to changing the documentation > design/philosophy.... again. :( > >> Having the demo .rst files with the dolfin demos would (a) make it more >> obvious to update them when updating the code and (b) make it easier to >> ensure valid documentation for stable releases. > > I bet that the .rst files for the demos will not get updated just by > moving them to dolfin/demo (perhaps only the first week), It will make a difference for me, but maybe that's just me. > unless you > change (a) to: > (a) run the script test/verify_demo_code_snippets.py as part of 'make > test' in dolfin. I think this sounds like a good idea. > I agree on (b) > >> Wasn't the API documentation for the DOLFIN library moved in with the code >> for some of the same reasons? > > Possibly, again, this has changed so many times that I forgot why. > >> Writing documentation isn't that fun, so I would like to aim for a system >> that is maintainable. > > We'll never disagree on this one. > > We're currently copying the demo files (.py, .cpp, .ufl) anyway, it > should be just as easy to copy any .rst files. > > Perhaps the documentation of the demos could be self contained? > Such that we have an index.rst file in dolfin/demo which includes the rest? > Then it will be easy for dolfin developers to run a 'make html' > locally in the dolfin/demo directory to test that it works. > We can just use the Sphinx default styles. > Maybe, I'm not quite sure what it entails. I'll open up a new blueprint when I get back on Wednesday, unless someone beats me to it. -- Marie > Kristian > >> -- >> Marie >> >> >>> Kristian >>> >>>> (I'm on very flaky wifi until Wednesday morning and at the moment slightly >>>> unable to do anything but occasionally retrieve email...) >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Marie >>>> >>>> >>>>> Garth >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ffc >>>>> Post to : [email protected] >>>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ffc >>>>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ffc >>>> Post to : [email protected] >>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ffc >>>> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >>>> >> _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ffc Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ffc More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
