Eric Hodel wrote:
Which is exactly as it should be, WEBrick is not mentioned in lib/.document:
$ grep -i webrick lib/.document
Somebody needs to make sure that they're OK to be RDoc'd and get them added to lib/.document.
What's the criteria? I can think of two things offhand:
* The code does not redefine any other classes (as this tends to boink
the original ri files.) E.g., it is not adding or altering methods in,
say, Array or String. (Or, if it does redefine stuff, that part does not get ri'ed. I think nodoc can handle that.)
I think if the documentation mentions where non-core methods come from that'd be enough. There are a few non-core methods listed in ri (Time#iso8601 comes from time.rb). Maybe just adding "require 'foo'" to the synopsis.
Personally, I'd rather see some documentation that confuses origin over no docs.
* The code has some useful docs.
Certainly it would be nice to get those doc'ed libs from the stdlib into
ri by default.
Most importantly, post patches to ruby-core. I RDoc'd resolv.rb a few months back.
On 23 Aug 2005, at 17:56, James Britt wrote:
Eric Hodel - email@example.com - http://segment7.net
FEC2 57F1 D465 EB15 5D6E 7C11 332A 551C 796C 9F04