[lazarus] Request for Web Site

[Jeff Wormsley]

On 7/26/99, at 8:52 AM, Michael A. Hess wrote: 

>
>I think it is something that is needed but maybe it should be combined
>with the documation, documotion, docu....oh whatever it's called.

Hehe, "Real programmers don't document... Documentation, weee don't neeeed no steeenking documentation!"

>Did you look at the tool that MVC talked about. It looks really neat and
>would kill 2 birds with one stone. It would make building the files you
>are talking about real easy. As the files change just run it through the
>tool again to build your new file.
>
>Of course this will rely on comments and information being made
>available in the source code itself. However if you use this on the
>files it will then help point out exactly what needs to have comments
>added.
>
>http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Lakes/6686/pasdoc.html
>
>I like this because it means that all the developers then will be
>lending a hand to the actual documunchin .... I'll get it yet.  :-)

I haven't had an opportunity yet.  Like you say, it does require work on the programmers part, which isn't a bad thing.  What I was planning on doing was making an inititial page with the contents of the lcl directory, then running CVS with the right options to determine which files had changed on a fairly regular basis (not every day, I don't have that much time!).  For each file that changed, I could then use the changes to update the page.

>PS: By the way Jeff your reply to still is being forced.

Hmm, that must have been sent from my work account.  Sometimes I forget to change the sender.  Was it jwormsley at debitek.com?  If so, then that explains it, as the daworm at cdc.net did have the reply-to removed.  I removed it from the other as well, but it may cause confusion in my work mail (I'm postmaster anyway, so I'll get it even if it misaddresses...)

Jeff.