Re: 1.9 API review

2015-03-23 Thread Stefan Fuhrmann
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 8:40 PM, Stefan Fuhrmann < stefan.fuhrm...@wandisco.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 3:11 PM, Stefan Fuhrmann < > stefan.fuhrm...@wandisco.com> wrote: > >> On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Branko Čibej wrote: >> >>> I've started a page on the Wiki for the pre-rele

Re: 1.9 API review

2015-03-16 Thread Stefan Fuhrmann
On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 3:11 PM, Stefan Fuhrmann < stefan.fuhrm...@wandisco.com> wrote: > On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Branko Čibej wrote: > >> I've started a page on the Wiki for the pre-release API review. I guess >> I'm jumping the gun just a bit, but a couple days ago I noticed some >> mi

Re: 1.9 API review

2015-03-05 Thread Stefan Fuhrmann
On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 3:23 PM, Julian Foad wrote: > Stefan Fuhrmann wrote: > >I'm currently reviewing svn_fs.h and svn_repos.h. > [...] > > * Function references (e.g. in @see) should not > > have "()" attached to them - just to be consistent > > with what we do in most other places. > > I h

Re: 1.9 API review

2015-03-05 Thread Julian Foad
Stefan Fuhrmann wrote: >I'm currently reviewing svn_fs.h and svn_repos.h. [...] > * Function references (e.g. in @see) should not >   have "()" attached to them - just to be consistent >   with what we do in most other places. I have adopted the practice of identifying functions with () in Doxygen

Re: 1.9 API review

2015-03-05 Thread Stefan Fuhrmann
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Branko Čibej wrote: > I've started a page on the Wiki for the pre-release API review. I guess > I'm jumping the gun just a bit, but a couple days ago I noticed some > missing bits in the docstrings of two functions, and though it better to > just put this in the