[FFmpeg-cvslog] r23968 - trunk/Doxyfile

[Michael Niedermayer]

On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 12:05:49PM +0200, diego wrote:
> Author: diego
> Date: Fri Jul  2 12:05:49 2010
> New Revision: 23968
> 
> Log:
> Update Doxyfile to the format preferred by Doxygen 1.5.6 (via 'doxygen -u').
> 
> This is the version available in Debian stable, so it should be a reasonable
> baseline that can be expected to be available on all developer machines.


[...]
> +STRIP_FROM_INC_PATH    =
> +
> +# If the SHORT_NAMES tag is set to YES, doxygen will generate much shorter
> +# (but less readable) file names. This can be useful is your file systems
> +# doesn't support long names like on DOS, Mac, or CD-ROM.
> +
> +SHORT_NAMES            = NO
> +
> +# If the JAVADOC_AUTOBRIEF tag is set to YES then Doxygen
> +# will interpret the first line (until the first dot) of a JavaDoc-style
> +# comment as the brief description. If set to NO, the JavaDoc
> +# comments will behave just like regular Qt-style comments
> +# (thus requiring an explicit @brief command for a brief description.)
> +
> +JAVADOC_AUTOBRIEF      = YES
> +
> +# If the QT_AUTOBRIEF tag is set to YES then Doxygen will
> +# interpret the first line (until the first dot) of a Qt-style
> +# comment as the brief description. If set to NO, the comments
> +# will behave just like regular Qt-style comments (thus requiring
> +# an explicit \brief command for a brief description.)
> +
> +QT_AUTOBRIEF           = NO
> +
> +# The MULTILINE_CPP_IS_BRIEF tag can be set to YES to make Doxygen
> +# treat a multi-line C++ special comment block (i.e. a block of //! or ///
> +# comments) as a brief description. This used to be the default behaviour.
> +# The new default is to treat a multi-line C++ comment block as a detailed
> +# description. Set this tag to YES if you prefer the old behaviour instead.
> +
> +MULTILINE_CPP_IS_BRIEF = NO
> +
> +# If the DETAILS_AT_TOP tag is set to YES then Doxygen
> +# will output the detailed description near the top, like JavaDoc.
> +# If set to NO, the detailed description appears after the member
> +# documentation.
> +
> +DETAILS_AT_TOP         = NO
> +
> +# If the INHERIT_DOCS tag is set to YES (the default) then an undocumented
> +# member inherits the documentation from any documented member that it
> +# re-implements.
> +
> +INHERIT_DOCS           = YES
[...]

> -# If the JAVADOC_AUTOBRIEF tag is set to YES then Doxygen
> -# will interpret the first line (until the first dot) of a JavaDoc-style
> -# comment as the brief description. If set to NO, the JavaDoc
> -# comments  will behave just like the Qt-style comments (thus requiring an
> -# explict @brief command for a brief description.
> -
> -JAVADOC_AUTOBRIEF      = YES
> -
> -# The MULTILINE_CPP_IS_BRIEF tag can be set to YES to make Doxygen
> -# treat a multi-line C++ special comment block (i.e. a block of //! or ///
> -# comments) as a brief description. This used to be the default behaviour.
> -# The new default is to treat a multi-line C++ comment block as a detailed
> -# description. Set this tag to YES if you prefer the old behaviour instead.
> -
> -MULTILINE_CPP_IS_BRIEF = NO
> -
> -# If the DETAILS_AT_TOP tag is set to YES then Doxygen
> -# will output the detailed description near the top, like JavaDoc.
> -# If set to NO, the detailed description appears after the member
> -# documentation.
> -
> -DETAILS_AT_TOP         = NO
> -
> -# If the INHERIT_DOCS tag is set to YES (the default) then an undocumented
> -# member inherits the documentation from any documented member that it
> -# reimplements.
> -
> -INHERIT_DOCS           = YES
> -
>  # If the INLINE_INFO tag is set to YES (the default) then a tag [inline]
>  # is inserted in the documentation for inline members.
>  

This mixes cosmetics and functional changes
and with that is totally undecipherable
what is added? what is moved? what is changed?

also you are not maintainer of this file. You steped back from this post,
act that way please. You cant step back from positions and then continue to
act as if you had not done so.

The update in principle is appreciated and i support it but mixing cosmetics
and functional changes is not something that you can commit to code
maintained by others without prior discussion. Such changes are
unreviewable. Now if that had been discussed and people agreed that we should
stil commit the update as is then all fine but you skiped that and this is
not ok.

[...]

-- 
Michael     GnuPG fingerprint: 9FF2128B147EF6730BADF133611EC787040B0FAB

Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being
governed by those who are dumber. -- Plato 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.mplayerhq.hu/pipermail/ffmpeg-cvslog/attachments/20100702/49c15d49/attachment.pgp>