Re: [reSIProcate] Documentation push

[Byron Campen <bcampen@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

	I hope you do not expect _that_ degree of doxygen, but I do agree it  
could use some work. The important classes do need at least a brief  
description of what they are intended to do, in what cases one might  
be expected to interact directly with them, and what is likely to  
make them break (if they are fragile).

Best regards,
Byron Campen

> As a UA developer, I 100% agree with you about the multiple calls, and
> associating application data.
>
> In addition, the provided doxygen documentation is quite helpful, but
> could be expanded by extra "developer" notes about classes, functions
> and data. Please look at TrollTech's Qt Documentation for examples of
> how nice documentation can be:
>
> http://doc.trolltech.com/4.2/
> http://doc.trolltech.com/4.2/qwidget.html - Look at detailed  
> description
> area in addition to each itemized function call.
>
> -Aron.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: resiprocate-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:resiprocate-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> Scott Godin
> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 9:33 AM
> To: Byron Campen; resiprocate-devel
> Subject: Re: [reSIProcate] Documentation push
>
> I agree - I think another equal barrier is the completeness of the
> sample applications in the test directories - mainly dum.  It would be
> nice to have a more complete sample UA.  I think the #1 point of
> confusion for UA developers is how to associate application data to
> calls and how to manage multiple calls - this is documented, but we  
> lack
> a good example.
>
> Scott
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: resiprocate-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:resiprocate-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> > Byron Campen
> > Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 12:17 PM
> > To: resiprocate-devel
> > Subject: [reSIProcate] Documentation push
> >
> >         In thinking about things that we can do to boost interest in the
> > resiprocate project, I have come to the conclusion that the primary
> > barrier to entry is the quality/quantity of documentation. Are there
> > others that agree with this assessment?
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Byron Campen
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> resiprocate-devel mailing list
> resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://list.resiprocate.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel
>
> _______________________________________________
> resiprocate-devel mailing list
> resiprocate-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://list.resiprocate.org/mailman/listinfo/resiprocate-devel

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature