GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 619919
[libpeas] Fix documentation build
Last modified: 2010-05-30 00:17:14 UTC
Created attachment 162182 [details] [review] Fix documentation build The attached patch fixes building the reference documentation as the version number has been changed and also some symbols were renamed/moved.
Review of attachment 162182 [details] [review]: Thank you for your patch. Below are my remarks. This is mostly about improving the skiplist and hiding the "FooPrivate" structs. btw I have requested a libpeas bugzilla account (bug 619918). ::: docs/reference/Makefile.am @@ +58,3 @@ + peas-extension-c.h \ + peas-extension-seed.h \ + peas-extension-python.h Shouldn't you also add config.h in there? It looks like there is a section for it in libpeas-sections.txt. Also add peas-introspection.h and peas-i18n.h to be complete. ::: docs/reference/libpeas-docs.sgml @@ +19,3 @@ <title>Core Classes</title> <xi:include href="xml/peas-engine.xml"/> + <xi:include href="xml/peas-extension.xml"/> PeasExtensionSet and PeasExtensionBase are missing here. ::: docs/reference/libpeas-sections.txt @@ +20,3 @@ +PeasUIPluginManager +PeasUIPluginManagerClass +PeasUIPluginManagerPrivate The private type shouldn't be referenced here, as it is supposed private. If it appears here then it appears in the PeasUIPluginManager page, which I feel is not desirable. @@ +37,3 @@ PeasEngine +PeasEngineClass +PeasEnginePrivate ditto @@ +81,3 @@ +PeasExtensionSet +PeasExtensionSetClass +PeasExtensionSetPrivate ditto. Do you think there is a way to filter out those private classes so this hand management doesn't have to be done? @@ +130,3 @@ + +<SECTION> +<FILE>config</FILE> This file should not appear here. @@ +173,3 @@ + +<SECTION> +<FILE>peas-i18n</FILE> This file is private, so it should be added to the skiplist. @@ +215,2 @@ <SECTION> +<FILE>peas-introspection</FILE> This file is not installed, so it should probably be skipped too.
Created attachment 162203 [details] [review] Fix documentation take 2 This patch should implement all of the review requirements, the way the private fields are hidden is based on the glib documentation. I haven't found any other non-ugly way to do this.