Martin's comment from that issue:
I wanted to reply here because it thought it could do with more general discussion.
Surely, developers are mostly interested in HEAD, so why are we building phpdocs from a stable branch?
In an ideal world, I would like to see would be http://phpdocs.moodle.org/ having the docs for head, and http://phpdocs.moodle.org/1.8, http://phpdocs.moodle.org/1.7, etc having the docs for the various supported stable branches. And all this automatically rebuilt once a day by cron.
Of course, this is not very high priority.
And the other side of the equation is improving the quality of the comments in the code, so the PHPdocs are a useful reference.
Ah, i think the .php in some filenames was making it be interpreted by apache as php ... fixed now by disabling php for that domain (and I updated it to phpdocumentor 1.3.1 and Moodle 1.8).
These will help with improving documentation:
I wanted to reply here because it thought it could do with more general discussion.
Surely, developers are mostly interested in HEAD, so why are we building phpdocs from a stable branch?
In an ideal world, I would like to see would be http://phpdocs.moodle.org/ having the docs for head, and http://phpdocs.moodle.org/1.8, http://phpdocs.moodle.org/1.7, etc having the docs for the various supported stable branches. And all this automatically rebuilt once a day by cron.
Of course, this is not very high priority.
And the other side of the equation is improving the quality of the comments in the code, so the PHPdocs are a useful reference.
Actually my impression is that most module developers and casual developer would be developing against the stable branches (think extensions to fit into a University).
I hope most of the core developers have enough of Moodle in their head (or a good IDE
) that they don't need this web-based reference. 
+100 for more phpdocs on every function, though.
I hope most of the core developers have enough of Moodle in their head (or a good IDE
+100 for more phpdocs on every function, though.