1. Documentation changes suggested for Win32lib
I would like to make some changes to the win32lib documentation.
It turns out the Bitmap controls will not be affected by graphics
functions. I didn't expect this. It turns out you need to use Pixmap .
This only dawned on me when I went to the demos to see what might be
wrong with my code.
A function such as bitBlt() sounds like it something that expects a
bitmap. I wonder why they didn't call it pixBlt() :) I think this
should be added to the documentation.
I haven't seen a release of win32lib.e in the archive more recent than 2004.
I therefore wonder if the curator has gotten married and got a good job. ;)
Who is maintaining this package these days?
Shawn
2. Re: Documentation changes suggested for Win32lib
Shawn Pringle wrote:
>
> I would like to make some changes to the win32lib documentation.
>
> It turns out the Bitmap controls will not be affected by graphics
> functions. I didn't expect this. It turns out you need to use Pixmap .
> This only dawned on me when I went to the demos to see what might be
> wrong with my code.
> A function such as bitBlt() sounds like it something that expects a
> bitmap. I wonder why they didn't call it pixBlt() :)
Don't know. It was already there when I came to the library.
> I think this
> should be added to the documentation.
Agreed.
> I haven't seen a release of win32lib.e in the archive more recent than 2004.
> I therefore wonder if the curator has gotten married and got a good job. ;)
I've now in my 29th year of marriage and have a great job. Both keep me very
busy too.
> Who is maintaining this package these days?
Me. And thanks to the great work by many people, new fixes and contributions
have been submitted and are currently being tested and packaged for release.
There will be a release of Win32Lib v1.0 quite soon. At that point somebody else
might like to take up the reigns.
--
Derek Parnell
Melbourne, Australia
Skype name: derek.j.parnell
3. Re: Documentation changes suggested for Win32lib
Derek Parnell wrote:
>
>
> > Who is maintaining this package these days?
>
> Me. And thanks to the great work by many people, new fixes and contributions
> have been submitted and are currently being tested and packaged for release.
> There will be a release of Win32Lib v1.0 quite soon. At that point somebody
> else might like to take up the reigns.
I'm not volunteering to be the maintainer, but I definitely think we should
put it up on sourceforge in svn.
Matt
4. Re: Documentation changes suggested for Win32lib
Matt Lewis wrote:
>
> I definitely think we should
> put it up on sourceforge in svn.
Excellent Idea. I'll get on to that. There is already a sourceforge project for
the library so SVN upload should be a no-brainer (FLW) ...
--
Derek Parnell
Melbourne, Australia
Skype name: derek.j.parnell
5. Re: Documentation changes suggested for Win32lib
- Posted by Matt Lewis <matthewwalkerlewis at gmail.com>
Jan 27, 2007
-
Last edited Jan 28, 2007
Derek Parnell wrote:
>
> Matt Lewis wrote:
> >
> > I definitely think we should
> > put it up on sourceforge in svn.
>
> Excellent Idea. I'll get on to that. There is already a sourceforge project
> for the library so SVN upload should be a no-brainer (FLW) ...
SVN is enabled for the project now, so you just need to push the code
up to the repository. Also, I recommend we stick with the standard
recommended directory structure:
branches/
tags/
trunk/
...and put the code as it exists now into the trunk directory. Since you're
an admin, you should be all set to go.
Matt
