> Richard, your argument is a distraction from the important issue at > hand. Unless you posit that there is no useful way in which to generate > documentation from code (and comments therein), which seems an extreme > statement, then it is desirable that we have the ability to do that. > Right now we don't. That's bad.
"bad" isn't very precise. The claim was made that a reason that it's "bad" is that not being able to automatically generate documentation lowers the quality of the documentation. That's what I disagree with. > But, there is nothing that says that both kinds of documentation might > not be located physically in the code, so that when you > add/delete/modify a constraint you can also easily update the > documentation. In that case, wouldn't we have two distinctly different kinds of material in the same file: an extract from a manual and code. So why couldn't the file have a license that says "this part is GFDL and this part is GPL"?
