Merged. BR Martin
> On 29. Aug 2022, at 23:22, Willow Liquorice <wil...@howhill.com> wrote: > > Right, well, I've cleaned up dev/willow/doxygen_comments and pushed it. It's > in a suitable position to be merged; I can resume work on another > branch. > > I've opened an issue (https://bugs.gnunet.org/view.php?id=7314) where we can > coordinate clearing redundant Doxygen comments. It's lighter work now, but a > helping hand wouldn't go amiss. > > Best wishes, > Willow > > On 28/08/2022 09:06, Schanzenbach, Martin wrote: >>> On 28. Aug 2022, at 00:20, Willow Liquorice <wil...@howhill.com> wrote: >>> >>> My local dev/willow/doxygen is ahead by 27 commits, which can just be >>> cherrypicked onto a new branch if that's what needs to be done, but >>> extracting gnunet.tag might be a bit tricky if we want to try that. >>> >> No need for that. Even if gnunet.tag is in intermediate commits, that is >> fine. >>> The tagfile is something internal to doxygen, I think it's what allows it >>> to track links. Probably best to leave it untracked. >>> >> yea >>> Looking at the history, it got tracked inadvertently right at the start of >>> /dev/willow/doxygen (98fa6eda7). There's a pair of my local commits that >>> modify it, too. >>> >>> I can move the progress to a new branch and safely remove those commits, >>> but I don't know about how to deal with 98fa6eda7, as it's bundled with a >>> lot of other changes. Dealing with it on origin is probably the way to go, >>> then (if necessary) I can just pull the changes down as local master HEAD >>> is at 69844eac. >>> >>> How does that sound? >>> >> you can just try to merge it into master as well. >>> I've also got this weird contrib/build-common/ directory that has been >>> sitting around untracked in my local repository. Should it be like that? >>> >> I think build-common was removed a few releases ago. you can remove this >> folder. >> BR >>> Best wishes, >>> Willow >>> >>> On 27/08/2022 13:01, Schanzenbach, Martin wrote: >>>>> On 26. Aug 2022, at 23:41, Willow Liquorice <wil...@howhill.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hello again, >>>>> >>>>> I've put a .gitignore in doc/doxygen on my local dev/willow/doxygen, so >>>>> the Doxygen output (along with other autogenerated files) doesn't get >>>>> tangled up in the git history. Should .gitignore include gnunet.tag too? >>>> I'm not sure what that file does. But I guess, yes. >>>>> >>>>> I've got a good workflow for stripping redundant doc comments in Neovim. >>>>> I've already put a dent in the number of warnings doxygen spits out in >>>>> the day or two since I cracked it. There are notes on that workflow in >>>>> contrib/warningfilter.py on my local branch. >>>>> >>>>> I also hacked Makefile.am and the doxyfile to automate updating >>>>> PROJECT_NUMBER, so you can look forward to that too once I've tidied up >>>>> the branch. It's a bit inelegant but it gets the job done. >>>>> >>>> Please keep in mind to work on new branches, i.e. not branches I already >>>> merged. >>>> Because they would require a new rebase and I am not sure atm if you >>>> branches currently diverge from what is online. >>>> Thanks! >>>> BR >>>>> Best wishes, >>>>> Willow >>>>> >
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
