Awkwardsaw
2009-09-30 05:22:33
i'v always noticed this, and its been bugging me for ever too lol. the SRL manual is very outdated, by like what, 2 years? this isnt very usefull to the new people, or people like me that need to know if there is a function for something, and need to know very fast without looking in the includes :(
i know this isnt very much of a big deal, and probobly no one cares about this what so ever, but it would be awesome if the manual can get updated :D
i will also be glad to help out in the updating, because i'm sure it will be a lot of hard boring repetitive work
Sandstorm
2009-09-30 05:23:24
I have days of free time, I'm also available to help.
~Sandstorm
Baked0420
2009-09-30 05:24:08
And this has been mentioned on here more then once, I know I read at least two threads just like this before, I doubt anything will be done :p hopefully someone decides to finally update it though, I'd also help out with what I can :)
Dan Cardin
2009-09-30 05:48:24
it would be nice if they allowed the members to do something about it. "We're either too lazy or don't have the time to, but we wont allow anyone else to do it, so it will just not get done"
Baked0420
2009-09-30 05:54:05
oh, we're not allowed to? that's why it's been outdated for over 9000 days?
Dan Cardin
2009-09-30 14:47:19
From: Baked0420
oh, we're not allowed to? that's why it's been outdated for over 9000 days?
i suppose you could do it, but like a bunch of other things, the higher ups won't usually accept it or do anything about it unless one of them does it. So even if you do a fantastic job in updating it, there's no guarantee it'll be used. Seeing as as far as i know a lot of them are very open source kind of people, you'd think they'd put more faith in community driven projects.
Lorax
2009-09-30 16:35:37
The autoupdater must've been broken, it used to update itself :)
Sir R. M8gic1an
2009-09-30 17:17:12
it should be up to date…
~RM
Sandstorm
2009-09-30 18:36:56
We could do that to, I guess, but I'd have to talk to them about it (I have a lot of time, no problems with helping).
~Sandstorm
Dan Cardin
2009-09-30 22:01:53
where is it? I cannot seem to find it.
Dan Cardin
2009-10-01 04:46:51
ah. Not what i was talking about. I thought we were talking about the one that used to be linked to on the main page.
EDIT: though i do think it would serve itself much better being on the wiki, with more comprehensive examples like what we tried starting on freddy's wiki with the SCAR manual.
Sandstorm
2009-10-01 04:51:37
I'd be happy to help with that, if anyone wants to pitch in with me.
~Sandstorm
Wizzup?
2009-10-02 02:44:48
There should be no hand writing manuals, especially if the comments are parse-able. :p
Dan Cardin
2009-10-06 14:50:58
From: Wizzup?
There should be no hand written manuals, especially if the comments are parse-able. :p
?
Thats just completely silly. It would be more like a very comprehensive help file. I always like to use the comparison to the php manual.
Wizzup?
2009-10-06 14:56:27
From: Dan Cardin
?
Thats just completely silly. It would be more like a very comprehensive help file. I always like to use the comparison to the php manual.
My spelling was correct. I meant that there shouldn't be any hand writing the manuals.
Dan Cardin
2009-10-06 22:04:52
unless you still are saying what i thought you were saying and responded to, i dont understand you.
Wizzup?
2009-10-06 22:07:55
From: Dan Cardin
unless you still are saying what i thought you were saying and responded to, i dont understand you.
I don't see your point though. What exactly do you ask? :)
From: Wizzup?
I don't see your point though. What exactly do you ask? :)
He means he doesn't understand what you mean.
Dan Cardin
2009-10-07 23:56:03
lol, i meant, are you implying that a person shouldnt write the manual, and that it should be generated? If so, i disagree and point you to the php manual.