Anybody still using the chm docs

Danni Coy danni.coy at gmail.com
Sun Feb 18 00:52:28 UTC 2018


Is the reason for favouring chm as a format that it fits in with the visual
studio ecosystem better?
Having used both pdf and chm help on Linux I don't see a huge amount of
difference between competent reading applications.

On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 7:23 AM, Manu via Digitalmars-d <
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:

> On 17 February 2018 at 07:04, Martin Nowak via Digitalmars-d <
> digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, 15 June 2016 at 10:58:04 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
>>
>>> It's a huge maintenance effort for us to produce the chm files.
>>> We no longer generate documentation on Windows, but just for the chm
>>> generation we have dedicated tools [¹] to create an index (from a json
>>> generated via ddoc) and copy the html files.
>>> So I'm wondering if in 2016 someone really needs an offline copy of a
>>> website shipped with a binary release?
>>>
>>
>> Let's pull the plug, I think everybody agrees that we have more important
>> issues than maintaining d.chm and dman (which hasn't been shipped since
>> 2.076 anyhow).
>> Consider both tools as offered for adoption (as an external service or
>> download).
>>
>> https://github.com/dlang/installer/pull/298
>
>
>
> Wait, what? You asked if people used them, found that they did, then
> pulled the plug anyway? O_o
> Try running WINE on the build machine... it's trivial to setup.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20180218/12858dec/attachment.html>


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list