Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=617592 --- Comment #4 from Chen Lei <supercyper1@xxxxxxxxx> 2010-08-04 06:12:31 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) > > > libaccounts-qt also provides .qch docs which is used by assitant. Install .qch > > files to version doc directories is unacceptable which will break bookmarks > > when updating libaccounts-qt. It may be better to simply delete html docs which > > provides the same contents with .qch files. > > > > What's your opinion? > > I would tend to remove the qch docs and go with html only, as it's the more > common format especially for API docs. I don't think most developers would > prefer qch over html but might miss the latter. Splitting qch and html docs to > different directories is also a bad idea. Thus, I would simply drop the qch > file. Obviously, html docs is a much more common API docs format. But since qt 4.7, assistant_adp is dropped by Nokia. assitant-qt4 in qt-devel can only be used to open qch files. assistant/assistant_adp are far better tools than normal browser(e.g. firefox) to browse qt related api docs. Also it seems qt-doc installs both qch and html api docs to un-versioned directory. There's some discussion on this topic several months ago on KDE-SIG meetings. See http://www.mail-archive.com/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg07695.html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review