[Gtkradiant] Re: Q3Radiant Docs and UI
Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:54:18 +0100
Updating the documentation sounds good... there are many many
undocumented features, and I have recieved a few comments about
the manuals in CVS containing various errors and inconsistencies.
I'd welcome any contributions.. they could be in the form of diffs on
the html manuals in the CVS, so someone else could verify the
GtkRadiant 1.1-TA's codebase is unlikely to change, because
we're close to releasing a version that is more stable and usable
than any previous q3radiant, and it is becoming overdue.
GtkRadiant 1.2 could have some more major improvements in it,
assuming anyone has time to work on them =). I'd like to see the
codebase cleaned up and made more modular, so I'm planning to
spend time learning c++ until I've got the hang of classes and stuff.
All the contributions I make will be made with flexibility in mind, so
that adding new features and making improvements will hopefully
become easier in all areas, including UI.
On 20 Apr 01, at 9:43, Timothee Besset wrote:
> .. you should have sent this directly on the GtkRadiant mailing list ..
> Our current status about documentation and UI:
> The documentation base is at http://www.qeradiant.com/manual, and it's
> rather complete already. We have the current version of the manual in the
> CVS (search this list archives for CVS access information on zerowing or
> see the FAQ which SpoG updated recently
> http://www.qeradiant.com/faq/fom-serve/cache/116.html). The manual pages
> in CVS are in doc/manual and have been updated a bit with GtkRadiant
> screenshots instead of old Q3Radiant ones. But it's basically the same
> Radiant UI .. basically Radiant is constrained a lot by it's codebase. The
> source is messy in a lot of places and that puts some constraints on what
> you can do with it UI-wise. There is also the fact that the UI doesn't
> change a lot because everyone is used to the way it currently works.
> Let us know more precisely what you plan on doing..
> "Comrade.Cid theKillerRabbit" wrote:
> > Thanks for mailing me about this, guys - I do appreciate it
> > I'm on the GTK mailing list already, though I should probably clarify
> > that I have no interest in releasing my own copy of either GTKrad or its
> > documentation. Rather, I would like to contribute to the development
> > process (which I will do via Bugzilla/other formalized request
> > processes), and I would like to participate in the writing of the final
> > user manuals, rather than my own propietary release.
> > Specifically, I would like to have a very active role in documenting the
> > product UI and usage. This would entail me putting together a model for
> > the documentation layout, and assisting in the writing/editting of the
> > manuals as they progress. Like GTKrad development, this would be a
> > community effort in good faith and in-line with the EULA. I am willing
> > and able to do the work, and would rather the job be done properly, than
> > see it remain incomplete and out-of-date, as sometimes occured with
> > Q3rad (the documentation, although excellent, hasn't been officially
> > updated since build 192).
> > In that vein, should I proceed with the preliminary documentation
> > model?
> > thanks -Cid
> Gtkradiant mailing list