[kepler-dev] Does anyone know why the class KeplerDocumentationAttribute is part of Ptolemy instead of being part of Kepler?

[Christopher Brooks]

Hi David,

The rationale is in the cvs log for
ptolemy/vergil/basic/KeplerDocumentationAttribute.java

  revision 1.1
  date: 2007/03/14 20:23:15;  author: berkley;  state: Exp;

  modified GetDocumentationAction and DocAttribute so that the kepler
  documentation system can use the docviewer.  the
  KeplerDocumentationAttribute was also added.  It was added here
  instead of the kepler tree in order to keep ptolemy from requiring a
  kepler dependency and so that we would not have to make a local kepler
  copy of GetDocumentationAction and DocAttribute.  It can be moved
  later if a better way of instantiating kepler classes can be found.

I did not look to see if this was still valid.  If it is not
necessary, then moving KeplerDocumentationAttribute.java is fine with
me. 

BTW - I'm willing to give read/write CVS access to pretty much anyone who
needs it and is willing to following the Ptolemy coding style.

To get access, go to
http://chess.eecs.berkeley.edu/ptexternal/request
and request an account in the ptexternal workgroup.
Then go to
http://chess.eecs.berkeley.edu/options
and request a CVS account.

_Christopher


--------

    
    Hi All,
    
    I was wondering why the class KeplerDocumentationAttribute was not checked
    into Kepler instead of Ptolemy. In general, shouldn't all or most Kepler
    specific classes be part of our project, so that we do not have to
    coordinate updates of these classes with Ptolemy commiters? Any thoughts?
    
    -David Welker