Can someone tell me how generate a PDF of the User Guide (CI 2.0)?

[eluser]Anna_FL[/eluser]
Hi all,

I've seen the posts for the Codeigniter 2.0 user guides but even the latest was only done in Dec 2010 and includes outdated information.

Can anyone tell me a tool that I can use to generate an updated version? I've done a Google search but no luck for me.

I know it is in my downloaded Codeigniter directory but having a PDF helps me while in between classes, on the bus, so on.

Thanks for any help

[eluser]Basketcasesoftware[/eluser]
Someone just converted it to PDF in these forums. I don't remember who, or exactly which forum (sorry), but it was within this past week. I don't know how often the online version is updated. I know I submitted a fix several weeks back that was supposed to be incorporated, but that's the last I knew of it. Do a forum search for PDF

[eluser]2think[/eluser]
Anna_FL, I believe Adobe Acrobat can do what you're asking but of course that requires you to purchase.

I think I understand what you're saying, the 2.0 Userguides are 2.0 from last year, not the recent Feb xx release of Core.

If you do think about using the 1.7.x branch which has served many people well and is not prone to continuing updates, there is a very decent PDF file in these forums.

[eluser]Basketcasesoftware[/eluser]
Nope. Just prone to continuing bugs instead of continuing updates and when PHP 6 becomes more prevalent will rapidly become non-functional.

[eluser]2think[/eluser]
PHP 6? LOL.

There are quite a few substantial websites and client projects running 1.7.2 (and older) and doing fairly well...but that's reality not speculation.

[eluser]Basketcasesoftware[/eluser]
Yes, PHP 6. There is discussion about compatibility issues in various forums already. I was shocked to see it, but it's happening even now. And those websites may be doing very well under 1.7.2 (and older) but if I follow that line of reasoning I would recommend using Windows 98. There are systems still using it and doing fairly well. I've been in the IT field since the late 1970s and I've seen what happens when there is a failure to make reasonable system upgrades. Upgrades are created to solve problems and to extend functionality. 2.0 resolved issues that 1.7+ had. Admittedly it's probably added its own share, but I have done the profiling and it certainly is a faster framework and more stable framework. What precisely is your motive in trying to get people to develop in 1.7 over 2.0?

[eluser]2think[/eluser]
Good to hear you've been in the field about a decade before me and while I fully understand the reasoning you use for the Win 98 example but it seems to be only partially relevant.

You mentioned continuing bugs in the 1.7.2 base but many devs have overcome the bugs through patches, libs, etc. Not ideal but for many, it did work and continues to work. Being in the IT field for as long as you say, you would agree that any platform will have bugs, new or old.

I a solution to the OP who wanted what I would think was a reliable PDF. To my knowledge and after having downloaded a couple of 2.0 PDFs myself, it appeared there were versions that relied on an older User Guide with innaccuracies.

I couldn't suggest something that could give the OP an inaccurate way of doing things.

I don't doubt that 2.0 is better in many respects but I'm really uncertain regarding the experience/learning curve for new users without some items that were available back in the other versions.

[eluser]Basketcasesoftware[/eluser]
Good point. I've had to submit corrections to the current 2.0 user guide myself. Besides scaffolding, which was already deprecated in 1.7, what other significant features were eliminated that you think were vital to new users.

[eluser]2think[/eluser]
Funny you mentioned scaffolding, that was actually something I and some others I've worked with on projects enjoyed for testing.

I think the fixes for 2.0 far outweigh the relegated/removed so its hard to say.

I actually am very much in your camp with the 2.0 release being better but not because it is faster (I didn't do any benchmarks or see any) but it just seems more well thought out.

What was left out and vital to new users? I think the community and user guide/documentation were one of Codeigniter's superior features

I really don't know if that was given as much attention as the codebase but that's just my opinion and could be very mistaken.

[eluser]Basketcasesoftware[/eluser]
I never got to mess with scaffolding at all. Oh, well. And it was the level of documentation that brought me to CI in the first place. When one of the engineers makes a comment about a undocumented feature that 'everyone knows about' I tend to be pretty unhappy. There is NO undocumented feature that 'everyone knows about'. Heck, I have Reactor fork going on because of that feature. It was in 1.7, had a bad hack job to fix it up in 2.0, and I'm rewriting now. Crazy.