Topic: The impressiveness of documentation

Hi Vspader

I just reviewed your latest bugfix... Of course it is filled with other bugs... Just kidding wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the two.

But in trac you have documented the changes... Is that automatically generated? If so, how clever of the trac guys (who either ripped off, og got ripped off by, growl on the logo (or maybe they are the same band of heroes)). If not wow, I am impressed on your dedication to keeping records.

Keep up the good work, whatever .shn files and cue-sheets are, they seem to be very popular.



Ps. Sorry if the middel sentence doesn't make sense.

Re: The impressiveness of documentation

Cog uses something called subversion that keeps track of all source code changes. Anytime I send my changes to the Subversion repository, I include a short message saying what the changes are. It's standard practice, and you can check the history of almost any open source project (though not all use Trac, which just makes it more user friendly).  Trac simply grabs those messages and displays them.

Also, I'm betting the logos were developed independently (The two projects are unrelated). One's a paw, the other is a paw print, so there is a difference. Although, there are probably a million things that have a paw as a logo.

Re: The impressiveness of documentation


Probably true about the paw, I just wonderes... And hey, they are both open source, so maybe the logos are too.

Update: My bad, I compared trac's icon to growl's menu bar item icon, which is extremely similar to trac's.

Last edited by Zitz (2008-03-30 10:03:43)