I dunno, a running document like that is a pain in the ass to maintain IMHO since you have to duplicate a lot of text and potentially try to explain differences between versions. Why wouldn't it make sense to send folks using 5.4 to a concise set of documentation just for that version? <br>
<br>Steve<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 6:51 AM, Jeff McKenna <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com">jmckenna@gatewaygeomatics.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
Hi Steve,<br>
<br>
My position is that the doc contents should contain references to the MapServer version that the feature applies to. So yes we should maintain backwards compatibility. For example, /mapfile/expressions.txt could be separated into "MapServer 6.0 Expressions" and "MapServer 5 Expressions" sections. I would argue that this is much easier to maintain, and makes more sense to a user. It does ask doc contributors and developers to specifically mention the MapServer version when they are documenting though. I'll give an example of what I mean:<br>
<br>
Let's say I am a mapscript dev and I add a function to a mapscript. Then I'd go to its doc (meaning: in trunk and also in branch-whatever-is-live-on-<u></u>web, because a user wants to know what is available) and add:<br>
<br>
GetXXX<br>
Added in MapServer version 6.2, this function gets the...<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
I hope this helps clarify my position.<br>
<br>
-jeff<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 11-07-21 1:42 PM, Steve Lime wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
Question for folks. What's our position regarding multi-version support<br>
within the documentation? For example, there were a number of syntax<br>
changes related to logical expressions in 6.0. We could update the<br>
documentation to reflect 6.0 "as is" with no references to how things<br>
worked in older versions. We could also try to maintain some backwards<br>
compatibility so that the documentation could support all versions.<br>
Doing so requires lots of extra explanation though and makes it harder<br>
to maintain. If documentation is version specific then that would argue<br>
for historical documentation to be made available...<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div></div>
______________________________<u></u>_________________<br>
mapserver-dev mailing list<div class="im"><br>
<a href="mailto:mapserver-dev@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">mapserver-dev@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
</div><a href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev" target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/<u></u>mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br>