Minor changes to Doxygen files

Minor changes to Doxygen files
Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=91730

[Matt Ball, 2011-07-06 14:24:38]

Looks good overall, but I'm really hoping that this can be broken up into a
refactoring change (including the upgrade from Doxygen 1.7.2 to 1.7.4), followed
by a functional change so that it's easier to see which is which.

Cheers,
-Matt

http://codereview.chromium.org/7308009/diff/1/ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfile
File ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfile (left):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7308009/diff/1/ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfil...
ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfile:4: 
Do we want to remove this copyright statement?  I suspect that we may want to
keep it.

http://codereview.chromium.org/7308009/diff/1/ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfile
File ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfile (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7308009/diff/1/ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfil...
ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfile:1: # Doxyfile 1.7.4
This file contains lots of new trailing whitespace.  Please strip this trailing
whitespace out.

http://codereview.chromium.org/7308009/diff/1/ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfil...
ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfile:28: PROJECT_NAME           =
It looks like this change contains both functional changes (here, for example,
with removing the PROJECT_NAME) and cosmetic changes (as the result of upgrading
from Doxyfile 1.7.2 to 1.7.4).  This can make it very difficult to separate out
the intended functional changes from the sea of whitespace changes.  If
possible, please try to separate this out into a change that is only the result
of upgrading the Doxyfile (and stripping trailing whitespace), followed by a
functional change.

http://codereview.chromium.org/7308009/diff/1/ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfil...
ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfile:1651: GRAPHICAL_HIERARCHY    = YES
Is this an intentional functional change, or a result of upgrading the Doxyfile?

http://codereview.chromium.org/7308009/diff/1/ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfil...
ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfile:1691: DOT_GRAPH_MAX_NODES    = 57
Is this intentional, or a result of upgrading the Doxyfile?

http://codereview.chromium.org/7308009/diff/1/ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxygen...
File ppapi/cpp/documentation/DoxygenLayout.xml (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7308009/diff/1/ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxygen...
ppapi/cpp/documentation/DoxygenLayout.xml:1: <doxygenlayout version="1.0">
Are the changes in this file deliberate or a result of upgrading Doxygen?

http://codereview.chromium.org/7308009/diff/1/ppapi/cpp/documentation/removef...
File ppapi/cpp/documentation/removefilesCPP.sh (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7308009/diff/1/ppapi/cpp/documentation/removef...
ppapi/cpp/documentation/removefilesCPP.sh:33: rm hierarchy.ezt
It looks like the rest of the statements in this file are kept in alphabetical
order.  Maybe these should be in alphabetical order as well.  Also, to remind
others to keep alphabetical order, it might be useful to put in a comment at the
top to this effect.

[jond, 2011-07-06 21:06:04]

http://codereview.chromium.org/7308009/diff/1/ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxygen...
File ppapi/cpp/documentation/DoxygenLayout.xml (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7308009/diff/1/ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxygen...
ppapi/cpp/documentation/DoxygenLayout.xml:1: <doxygenlayout version="1.0">
They are deliberate and a result of moving from C to C++ API (these were
suggested header changes by Josie).

On 2011/07/06 14:24:38, Matt Ball wrote:
> Are the changes in this file deliberate or a result of upgrading Doxygen?

http://codereview.chromium.org/7308009/diff/1/ppapi/cpp/documentation/removef...
File ppapi/cpp/documentation/removefilesCPP.sh (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7308009/diff/1/ppapi/cpp/documentation/removef...
ppapi/cpp/documentation/removefilesCPP.sh:33: rm hierarchy.ezt
It was never meant to be in alpha order. 

On 2011/07/06 14:24:38, Matt Ball wrote:
> It looks like the rest of the statements in this file are kept in alphabetical
> order.  Maybe these should be in alphabetical order as well.  Also, to remind
> others to keep alphabetical order, it might be useful to put in a comment at
the
> top to this effect.

[jond, 2011-07-06 21:22:43]

http://codereview.chromium.org/7308009/diff/1/ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfile
File ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfile (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7308009/diff/1/ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfil...
ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfile:1: # Doxyfile 1.7.4
On 2011/07/06 14:24:38, Matt Ball wrote:
> This file contains lots of new trailing whitespace.  Please strip this
trailing
> whitespace out.

Done.

http://codereview.chromium.org/7308009/diff/1/ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfil...
ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfile:28: PROJECT_NAME           =
I only made a couple changes to the file - basically changing the graphical
hierarchy (turning to on) and taking out the project name so it doesn't appear
on every page.

On 2011/07/06 14:24:38, Matt Ball wrote:
> It looks like this change contains both functional changes (here, for example,
> with removing the PROJECT_NAME) and cosmetic changes (as the result of
upgrading
> from Doxyfile 1.7.2 to 1.7.4).  This can make it very difficult to separate
out
> the intended functional changes from the sea of whitespace changes.  If
> possible, please try to separate this out into a change that is only the
result
> of upgrading the Doxyfile (and stripping trailing whitespace), followed by a
> functional change.

http://codereview.chromium.org/7308009/diff/1/ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfil...
ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfile:1651: GRAPHICAL_HIERARCHY    = YES
Yes, we now create a graphical class hierarchy for the C++ stuff because the
textual one was bad and engineers didn't like it.

On 2011/07/06 14:24:38, Matt Ball wrote:
> Is this an intentional functional change, or a result of upgrading the
Doxyfile?

http://codereview.chromium.org/7308009/diff/1/ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfil...
ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfile:1691: DOT_GRAPH_MAX_NODES    = 57
Just an upgrade thing. I didn't touch it.
On 2011/07/06 14:24:38, Matt Ball wrote:
> Is this intentional, or a result of upgrading the Doxyfile?

[jond, 2011-07-06 21:28:53]

http://codereview.chromium.org/7308009/diff/1/ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfile
File ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfile (left):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7308009/diff/1/ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfil...
ppapi/cpp/documentation/Doxyfile:4: 
On 2011/07/06 14:24:38, Matt Ball wrote:
> Do we want to remove this copyright statement?  I suspect that we may want to
> keep it.

Done.

[Matt Ball, 2011-07-06 21:32:39]

LGTM

If possible, for similar changes in the future, it would be very useful to
separate out the upgrade phase of the Doxyfile into a separate CL so that it's
easier to identify the functional changes.

Thanks!
-Matt

[jond, 2011-07-07 15:06:11]

Can you LGTM this for me David?

[dmichael (off chromium), 2011-07-07 16:25:15]

On 2011/07/07 15:06:11, jond wrote:
> Can you LGTM this for me David?

rubber-stamp LGTM