pflarue
commented
3 weeks ago Thanks. This seems useful.
However, I'd like to see a couple of prominent statements added to the top of the new file. The first should clearly indicate that the contents of this file are intended to be descriptive rather than prescriptive.
The other is that, at least until the various "Needs developer review" statements can be removed, I'd like to see this clearly identified as a work in progress draft. I think that use of those "Needs developer review" statements are a good way of highlighting portions of this document that deserve additional attention.
While I understand that documentation can never be expected to be perfect, I think that adding these statements will help prevent someone not currently involved in development of ardopcf from putting too much faith in this document while significant improvements are still needed.
Initial documentation for the COMMAND TCP host interface, about ardop, and enumerated a very basic troubleshooting document.
For the TCP host interface, I went through the source code and used experimentation to figure out how to use most of these and what they were for, as well as reviewing older documentation.
For just 'about ardop' - I condensed the README and included some additional useful information.
For the troubleshooting, it's just basic info that might be helpful to people based on issues I've seen in the user groups.