[sr-dev] git:master: sl Minor README updates (file name changes)

[Olle E. Johansson]

21 dec 2012 kl. 17:15 skrev Daniel-Constantin Mierla <miconda at gmail.com>:

> 
> On 12/21/12 11:01 AM, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
>> [...]
>>>> At the end I wouldn't be against of having a (new) 'standard' way, but it has to be defined with some clear patterns/rules, because what you started to use as new name was not a 'standard' pattern so far.
>>> Ok. What's the proposal? I would prefer kamailio style file names and <book> as the main item in the <modname>.xml file.
>> The Kamailio way is better, when comparing HTML output.
> The output is probably a matter of the root tag in the xml docs. All htmls are generated by the same command and use the same css file.

> 
> To put a bit more, kamailio inherited the initial structure, which was:
> - modname.xml - just the details about the author, editor, etc...
> - modname_admin.xml - the admin guide for the module
> - modname_devel.xml - the devel guide for the module
> - modname_faq.xml - the faq guide for the module
> 
> But 99% of the modules have only admin guide. This file became quite big for some files and I guess ser guys decided to split it in: params.xml, functions.xml, rpc.xml, ... Also, the first chapters (like short descriptions, dependencies) were moved to modname.xml. I think ser went for section as root tag for its docs, to be able to build one book, by including all the other xmls. Not sure it can be done anumore if the root tag is book for each module.
It can be done - it's a book set.

> 
> At the end the content is the same structure, but kept in different files.
My problem is having "params.xml" in many directories.
> 
> Can't say by now which broken-files structure is better. Let's see if there are other opinions.
> 
> But I would prefer to be something to stick with for long time if decide to change massively. For me is more important the internal structure (e.g., the chapter for listing the functions to be named 'Functions').
Absolutely.

Waiting for some sort of conclusion.
/O