opment@qt-project.org
Emne: Re: [Development] Harmonizing the Qt 5.x Documentation
On 13 Apr 2014, at 8:10 PM, André Pönitz wrote:
> Shawn wrote:
>> On 2 Apr 2014, at 6:07 PM, Ariel Molina wrote:
>>>
>>> Please whatever you do, do not break this anymore, the current
>>> st
On 13 Apr 2014, at 8:10 PM, André Pönitz wrote:
> Shawn wrote:
>> On 2 Apr 2014, at 6:07 PM, Ariel Molina wrote:
>>>
>>> Please whatever you do, do not break this anymore, the current
>>> state is already messed up.
>>
>> I agree. But I think the idea was to change it one last time and then
>
Shawn wrote:
> On 2 Apr 2014, at 6:07 PM, Ariel Molina wrote:
> >
> > Please whatever you do, do not break this anymore, the current
> > state is already messed up.
>
> I agree. But I think the idea was to change it one last time and then
> never change it again, and the docs that google finds s
On 2014-04-03 04:47, Thomas McGuire wrote:
> How about adding a "Versions" box to the sidebar that gives convenient
> links to all other versions of the QProcess documentation?
Yes, please; that's what Python does and it seems to work well. (You
could even add a cookie to always take the user to
Thomas McGuire schreef op 3-4-2014 10:47:
> Hi,
>
> On Thursday 03 April 2014 08:02:16 Rutledge Shawn wrote:
>> On 2 Apr 2014, at 6:07 PM, Ariel Molina wrote:
>>> The current state of Qt docs is very sad, making online searches near to
>>> useless. All Google searches refer either to broken pages,
Hi,
On Thursday 03 April 2014 08:02:16 Rutledge Shawn wrote:
> On 2 Apr 2014, at 6:07 PM, Ariel Molina wrote:
> > The current state of Qt docs is very sad, making online searches near to
> > useless. All Google searches refer either to broken pages, to 4.x doc
> > pages, to incomplete 5.0 unstable
On 2 Apr 2014, at 6:07 PM, Ariel Molina wrote:
> The current state of Qt docs is very sad, making online searches near to
> useless. All Google searches refer either to broken pages, to 4.x doc pages,
> to incomplete 5.0 unstables or even to 3.3 documentation. What's the point on
> having 5.x
The current state of Qt docs is very sad, making online searches near to
useless. All Google searches refer either to broken pages, to 4.x doc
pages, to incomplete 5.0 unstables or even to 3.3 documentation. What's the
point on having 5.x (or any) docs if you keep moving them around hiding it
from
On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 01:55:46PM +, Pasion Jerome wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
> We plan to deploy the redirects next week to avoid the Easter break;
> hopefully, Monday.
>
> Some more notes:
> A) The Qt 5.0, 5.1, and 5.2 documentation sets are already hosted in the
å vegne av
Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer [perezme...@gmail.com]
Sendt: 14. mars 2014 03:03
To: development@qt-project.org
Emne: Re: [Development] Harmonizing the Qt 5.x Documentation
On Tuesday 11 March 2014 09:22:40 Thiago Macieira wrote:
> Em ter 11 mar 2014, às 17:17:46, Andre Somers es
digia@qt-project.org
[development-bounces+jerome.pasion=digia@qt-project.org] på vegne av
Vladimir Minenko [vmine...@blackberry.com]
Sendt: 13. mars 2014 16:25
To: development@qt-project.org
Emne: Re: [Development] Harmonizing the Qt 5.x Documentation
On 12.03.14 10:37, "Pasion Jero
On Tuesday 11 March 2014 09:22:40 Thiago Macieira wrote:
> Em ter 11 mar 2014, às 17:17:46, Andre Somers escreveu:
> > I seriously don't see the benefit of this "harmonization". When I look
> > at the docs for a class, I often just look for method names that seem to
> > do what I need. That usually
On 12.03.14 10:37, "Pasion Jerome" wrote:
>1) The 5.0 and 5.1 documentation are already in the archives:
>http://doc.qt.digia.com/qt-5.0/qtdoc/index.html
>http://doc.qt.digia.com/qt-5.1/qtdoc/index.html
>The links to them will be published soon (around the time the redirects
>will be in place) her
Hi Jerome,
On 12 March 2014 17:37, Pasion Jerome wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Some comments:
>
> 0) We're trying to promote the latest documentation, which contains the
> latest fixes. 5.3 documentation is by-and-large much better than the 5.0 or
> 5.1 documentation. Whichever minor version of Qt 5
Thiago Macieira; development@qt-project.org
Emne: Re: [Development] Harmonizing the Qt 5.x Documentation
> Em ter 11 mar 2014, às 17:17:46, Andre Somers escreveu:
> > I seriously don't see the benefit of this "harmonization". When I look
> > at the docs for a class, I often j
> Em ter 11 mar 2014, às 17:17:46, Andre Somers escreveu:
> > I seriously don't see the benefit of this "harmonization". When I look
> > at the docs for a class, I often just look for method names that seem to
> > do what I need. That usually works very with Qt. Now, I will need to go
> > check for
Em ter 11 mar 2014, às 17:17:46, Andre Somers escreveu:
> I seriously don't see the benefit of this "harmonization". When I look
> at the docs for a class, I often just look for method names that seem to
> do what I need. That usually works very with Qt. Now, I will need to go
> check for every
Em ter 11 mar 2014, às 12:35:02, haithem rahmani escreveu:
> The Qt-5.2 has deprecated, added many APIs and attributes compared to
> Qt-5.1 and till new the documentation doesn't completely reflect that.
> Would this be fixed?
Additions are documented along with the version they were added.
--
Matthew Woehlke schreef op 11-3-2014 17:04:
> On 2014-03-11 05:01, Pasion Jerome wrote:
>> Short summary: We will be redirecting viewers of Qt 5.0 and Qt 5.1
>> documentation
>> to "Qt 5" documentation. Subsequently, we will remove the 5.0 and 5.1
>> documentation
>> from qt-project.org and we wi
On 2014-03-11 05:01, Pasion Jerome wrote:
> Short summary: We will be redirecting viewers of Qt 5.0 and Qt 5.1
> documentation
> to "Qt 5" documentation. Subsequently, we will remove the 5.0 and 5.1
> documentation
> from qt-project.org and we will place future Qt 5.x documentation in
> "Qt 5" (h
>
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 11:06:21 +0100
> From: Tomasz Siekierda
> Subject: Re: [Development] Harmonizing the Qt 5.x Documentation
> To: Pasion Jerome
> Cc: "development@qt-project.org" ,
> "inter...@qt-project.org"
On 11 March 2014 10:01, Pasion Jerome wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Short summary: We will be redirecting viewers of Qt 5.0 and Qt 5.1
> documentation
> to "Qt 5" documentation. Subsequently, we will remove the 5.0 and 5.1
> documentation
> from qt-project.org and we will place future Qt 5.x documentati
Hello all,
Short summary: We will be redirecting viewers of Qt 5.0 and Qt 5.1 documentation
to "Qt 5" documentation. Subsequently, we will remove the 5.0 and 5.1
documentation
from qt-project.org and we will place future Qt 5.x documentation in
"Qt 5" (http://qt-project.org/doc/qt-5/).
Note that
23 matches
Mail list logo
