we should not let somebody install the package via apm,
when xotcl binary is not installed; however,
once the xotcl binary is required this no problem.
It seems, that the
requirements for binaries are only checked in:
is this correct?
i will also check in the two patches from
installation docs: is it sufficient to more-or-less
transfer the instructions from the README file above to
of the HEAD revision and commit? who produces the html-files?
where should this go? development tutorial? development
reference? What about the following content:
- tutorial: pointing to www.xotcl.org
- functionality in xotcl-core:
* documentation of the xotcl-specifics for the
api-browser (ad_insproc, ad_proc, and ad_doc)
* using non-positional arguments
* sample using xotcl objects instead of name-spaces
(the simple note example)
* pointing to class descriptions of the api-browser
Is more needed? other suggestions?
i'll be on vacation from Sat until 14 days later, most
probably without internet access. So most of this will
happen after that.