[rabbitmq-discuss] RabbitMQ 2.7.0 is released
steve at rabbitmq.com
Wed Nov 9 16:54:52 GMT 2011
Thanks for your note. Please use the rabbitmq-discuss mailing list.
Unfortunately, we have a lot of different pieces of documentation, generated from
code changes, markdown, xml, docbook and so on (see below). [A valid response to
this point is 'you can't get there from here.']
In my limited experience, docbook comes with other issues, but we should
properly look into this.
Thank you for pointing out the formatting problems in the NDocProc-generated
API guide for the C# .NET client. I have raised a bug for this.
Steve Powell (a happy bunny)
----------some more definitions from the SPD----------
Avoirdupois phr. 'Would you like peas with that?'
Abbey adj. Quite like an Abbe.
Definite phr. 'It's hard of hearing, I think.'
Modest n. The most mod.
On 9 Nov 2011, at 15:42, Emanuele Aliberti wrote:
> On 09/11/2011 16:09, Steve Powell wrote:
>> On 9 Nov 2011, at 13:08, Busoli, Simone wrote:
>>> As a side note, in the User/API guide of the client libraries, it would be quite useful to be able to see just what has changed from the previous revision. To the naked eye is quite difficult to spot the differences.
>> This is quite a good point, and we can certainly look to do this,
>> but although it is quite easy to get detailed diff information from the code repositories
>> we currently don't have a way of easily generating this information
>> for the documentation. It would be a mammoth task at present.
>> If anyone has any ideas for helping to do this, we would be all ears.
> XML based documentation (DocBook?), with change traking editor?
> Note: in "RabbitMQ .NET client library API guide", page range 2-7, text overflows.
More information about the rabbitmq-discuss