Comment 1 Francis Upton IV 2009-04-28 12:09:38 EDT

Created attachment 133580 [details]
Current draft

Comment 2 Simon Zambrovski 2009-04-29 23:24:25 EDT

Created attachment 133858 [details]
CNF EclipseDoc proposal

I created the first draft of the restructured documentation. I moved things around and renamed them. I added some paragraphs in the "Operational Topics". I also changed the representation of the use cases. If the content is OK, we can reason about providing some pictures and screenshot. I think we can add more content for action binding/definition and popup definitions...

Comment 3 Simon Zambrovski 2009-04-29 23:26:38 EDT

BTW, I also fixed the locations in the topics.xml

Comment 4 Francis Upton IV 2009-04-30 00:43:59 EDT

Thank you for your contribution Simon, I will review this tomorrow.

Comment 5 Francis Upton IV 2009-06-03 14:43:49 EDT

*** Bug 270042 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 6 Francis Upton IV 2009-06-03 14:46:29 EDT

Released to HEAD, I20090603-2000, 3.5RC5

Thanks Simon for your contribution!

The released version is slightly different than that last patch.

Comment 7 Francis Upton IV 2009-06-03 14:47:42 EDT

This is a doc only change, but I added the iplog+ for the patch that was contributed.  Don't know if we need to track doc changes this way.

Comment 8 Simon Zambrovski 2009-06-04 02:42:08 EDT

I checked out the HEAD and could see the CVS-erge comments (like <<<<< 1.8) in the files. Seems that the CVS merge bugged. Please check if this is only my problem.

Comment 9 John Arthorne 2009-06-04 08:57:44 EDT

Yes, this doesn't look like it went in properly. A few of the files in the patch aren't in HEAD, and more importantly the topics_Guide.xml wasn't updated so the docs aren't in the table of contents (the patch contained the necessary changes to topics_Guide.xml but it looks like they weren't applied).

Comment 10 Francis Upton IV 2009-06-04 09:00:51 EDT

(In reply to comment #9)
> Yes, this doesn't look like it went in properly. A few of the files in the
> patch aren't in HEAD, and more importantly the topics_Guide.xml wasn't updated
> so the docs aren't in the table of contents (the patch contained the necessary
> changes to topics_Guide.xml but it looks like they weren't applied).
> 

I think Simon's merge issue is a local problem.

The missing files are intentional, there were not complete enough to be included.

I did forget about updating the topics_Guide.xml.  I will take care of that in a few hours.

Comment 11 John Arthorne 2009-06-04 09:06:01 EDT

The patch also deleted cnf_rcp.htm - was that also excluded intentionally? I.e., do the new pages replace the content from that page?

Comment 12 Francis Upton IV 2009-06-04 16:53:31 EDT

(In reply to comment #11)
> The patch also deleted cnf_rcp.htm - was that also excluded intentionally?
> I.e., do the new pages replace the content from that page?
> 
Yes, this was intentional.

Comment 13 Francis Upton IV 2009-06-04 16:54:00 EDT

Released the TOC file to HEAD, I20090604-2000, 3.5RC4