[Bug 617592] Review Request: libaccounts-qt - Library for handling the account storage

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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 at gmail.com> 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@lists.fedoraproject.org/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.