Created attachment 354878 [details] [diff] [review] patch v1 Per bug 471144, there is probably no need for the docs to be in string. Especially, quote >This document is now deprecated in favor of The new string guide >(http://www.mozilla.org/projects/xpcom/string-guide.html) We could just remove, and make any likns, no need to have old docs in the source when not needed.
Comment on attachment 354878 [details] [diff] [review] patch v1 Please leave xpcom/string/README.html; that shows up in http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/xpcom/, which is useful (we should have more of them). I still need to look through the doc and see what, if anything, should be migrated to our current docs.
You mean this? http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/xpcom/string/README.html?force=1 I have no stake in removing or keeping this, but as far as adding more like it, I'm curious: How is it useful?
Comment on attachment 354878 [details] [diff] [review] patch v1 Yeah; these should go. At some point I should probably revise https://developer.mozilla.org/en/XPCOM_string_guide a bit, but I don't think that blocks removing these. Sorry for taking so long to get to this.
The README.html is useful because it gives information about what's in a directory, just like comments at top of file give information about what's in a file. That's particularly useful when the comments are reliably present, as in http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/source/layout/style/
So are we removing or keeping the README.html?
keep xpcom/string/README.html; remove xpcom/string/doc/README.html
Created attachment 530467 [details] [diff] [review] Patch with comments addressed Ok, put the readme back, pulling down the r+
I tried to push this to cedar but the patch failed to apply. I'm not removing the checkin-needed keyword given that it might apply on mozilla-central. But Tyler, can you have a look and update the patch if needed?
BTW, a patch with a commit message and author name might be appreciated :)
(In reply to comment #8) > given that it might apply on mozilla-central. It doesn't -- but it's not due to bitrot. Tyler's patch has two issues (found from hg rm'ing the string docs myself and comparing his patch against the result): 1. Dos line endings 2. No newline at the end of the file His patch applies cleanly when I fix those (using "fromdos" tool to fix (1), and opening in emacs & inserting newline at the end to fix (2)). Given that this is just a removal of a few HTML documentation files, this should be safe to push as a one-off DONTBUILD cset, so I'll just do that since I've already fixed it up.
Fixed: http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/90ea82330ce6 Tyler, for future patches, if you could address comment 9 & also fix whatever caused the whitespace issues in comment 10, that'd be much appreciated. Thanks!