Re: PGDN source browser

Thanks!

Gevik babakhani wrote:

>Regarding to update the techdocs and not reinveting the wheel, I am having a
>mailng with Robert Treat of (webmaster pg) in order to see what can be
>done.. any help is welcome... :)
>
>Regards,
>Gevik.
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jonah H. Harris [mailto:jharris(at)tvi(dot)edu]
>Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 4:50 PM
>To: Tom Flavel
>Cc: Gevik babakhani; pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
>Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PGDN source browser
>
>Gevik,
>
>You still didn't answer my question as to why you're reinventing the
>wheel. Why not just work on updating techdocs instead?
>
>-Jonah
>
>
>Tom Flavel wrote:
>
>
>
>>On 04/06/2005 22:59:19, Gevik babakhani wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Dear all,
>>>
>>>The PostgreSQL Developer Network's Source Browser (beta1) is ready.
>>>
>>>If you got the time to check it for a moment, please do not hesitate to
>>>
>>>
>send
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Firstly, good that you're asking for comments (I assume as an attempt to
>>work with people), but starting an entirley seperatre "developer network"
>>seems rather like reinventing the wheel. Why not invest your time in
>>extending the existing rersources, rather than starting from scratch?
>>
>>
>>Other than saving me from downloading the source (which I keep around
>>anyway, mostly for ease of grepping for things the documentation cant be
>>expected to cover), I see no advantage to using this in it's current
>>form.
>>
>>To me, the point of a source browsing system is that it provides
>>information which a directory structure can't provide. Off the top of my
>>head:
>>
>>* CVS head. Without this, it's always going to be irrelevant to
>> developers who commit to postgresql itself.
>>* CVS history. If you're targeting this at developers, I'd think this is
>> important.
>>* Referencing between function calls and definitions (with ctags,
>> perhaps. Doxygen-style browsers do this.) To me, this is the single
>> only advantage of presenting source code in HTML: ease of navigation
>> by hyperlinks. Apart from that, web pages are pretty inconvenient (to
>> me, at least).
>>* Is a tree really appropiate? To compare two files (which is something
>> I might want to use this for), that'd require a lot of scrolling to
>> see where I am in the structure.
>>* diff.
>>
>>
>>Meanwhile, some aesthetic things which spring to mind:
>>
>>The syntax hilighting is confusing for non-.c files; quite a few are
>>parsed incorrectly around comments, and hilighting applied to strange
>>things in plain-text files.
>>
>>There is extreneous whitespace in the <pre> at the top by the line
>>numbers' gutters. There's a off-by-one error in your loop to pad out the
>>numbers: an extra space appears every power of 10.
>>
>>The "number of views" is irrelevant, as is the "...Source Browser" title
>>on each page, which is unneccessary.
>>
>>Hope that helps,
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>