Status

()

Core
String
--
minor
VERIFIED FIXED
9 years ago
5 years ago

People

(Reporter: Tyler, Assigned: Tyler)

Tracking

Trunk
Points:
---
Dependency tree / graph

Firefox Tracking Flags

(Not tracked)

Details

Attachments

(1 attachment, 1 obsolete attachment)

(Assignee)

Description

9 years ago
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.
Attachment #354878 - Flags: review?(scc)
(Assignee)

Updated

9 years ago
Assignee: nobody → tyler
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
(Assignee)

Updated

7 years ago
Attachment #354878 - Flags: review?(scc) → review?(dbaron)
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.
Attachment #354878 - Flags: review?(dbaron) → review+
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/
(Assignee)

Comment 5

6 years ago
So are we removing or keeping the README.html?
keep xpcom/string/README.html; remove xpcom/string/doc/README.html
(Assignee)

Comment 7

6 years ago
Created attachment 530467 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch with comments addressed

Ok, put the readme back, pulling down the r+
Attachment #354878 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #530467 - Flags: review+
(Assignee)

Updated

6 years ago
Keywords: checkin-needed
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!
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 6 years ago
Keywords: checkin-needed
Resolution: --- → FIXED
(Assignee)

Updated

5 years ago
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.