Documentation?

[Paul Vriens]

On 03/14/2010 11:58 AM, Paul Vriens wrote:
> On 03/14/2010 11:45 AM, Luke Benstead wrote:
>> On 14 March 2010 10:03, Roderick Colenbrander<thunderbird2k at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 11:40 PM, Scott Ritchie<scott at open-vote.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>> On 03/12/2010 11:01 AM, André Hentschel wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Folks,
>>>>> As we are getting somehow closer to Wine 1.2 i wonder how important
>>>>> updates on the Documentation are.
>>>>> Further i am confused about sending patches, should they just
>>>>> change the
>>>>> git-repo "docs" or the pages on the website or both?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The website pages are supposed to be automatically generated from
>>>> the docs
>>>> every release. So patch the docs themselves.
>>>>
>>>> Not sure if this process still works though.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Scott Ritchie
>>>>
>>>
>>> I thought the plans were to attempt to move all documentation (in an
>>> updated form) to the Wiki. We would then need some mechanism to create
>>> documentation out of the wiki. Myself I rather update the wiki when I
>>> encounter an issue than that I update the old docs.
>>>
>>> Roderick
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> While on the subject of documentation... would it be a good idea to
>> begin documenting functions with something like Doxygen or similar?
>> I'm just wondering if we could be building our own, much more
>> accurate, MSDN. Is there a reason that Wine isn't documented in this
>> way?
>
> We do have (the autogenerated) http://source.winehq.org/WineAPI/
>
> I know there is (was) an issue with the winapi tool so I can't tell if
> the API documentation on that page is accurate.
>

I think the page I mentioned is fine.

It's http://www.winehq.org/winapi_stats that didn't have an update in a 
while due to winapi issues.

-- 
Cheers,

Paul.