Github user Humbedooh closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/85
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the featur
Github user PSUdaemon commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/85#issuecomment-112869469
This is associated with JIRA TS-2803 which was closed as "won't fix". Can
this be closed now, or is there something here we need to reconsider?
---
If your proj
Github user bryancall commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/85#issuecomment-112869333
This is the Jira ticket for it
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-2803
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have you
Github user zwoop commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/85#issuecomment-56891475
Is this done/ If so, please close.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project doe
On May 17, 2014, at 7:57 PM, Jack Bates <6ny...@nottheoilrig.com> wrote:
> Good point,
> I'll look into whether those strings can be translated somehow.
I looked at this patch more today, and while I think it's a nice piece of work,
I question whether we should be splitting our API documentation
Good point,
I'll look into whether those strings can be translated somehow.
On 17/05/14 07:17 AM, Masakazu Kitajo wrote:
Extracting strings from sources would be nice, however, it makes me sad
because API reference pages will be untranslatable. But it's much better
than nothing or not maintained
Extracting strings from sources would be nice, however, it makes me sad
because API reference pages will be untranslatable. But it's much better
than nothing or not maintained. So, that's fine with me.
Personally, and as for API references, I don't build my own HTML docs
because I can't google/yah
On May 16, 2014, at 2:18 PM, James Peach wrote:
> Does anyone have any concerns about bringing in doxygen as a documentation
> build dependency?
As long as it’s optional, that seems fine. I doubt many (any?) people build the
docs, in fact, I still think we should stop building some of our doc
Does anyone have any concerns about bringing in doxygen as a documentation
build dependency?
On May 13, 2014, at 12:22 PM, jablko wrote:
> GitHub user jablko opened a pull request:
>
>https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/85
>
>docs: Add Doxygen group commands to API sections
>
GitHub user jablko opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/85
docs: Add Doxygen group commands to API sections
Where API reference pages match API sections, use the Doxygen group to
include the members' signatures.
You can merge this pull request into a
10 matches
Mail list logo
