Re: future of dhelp
Hello!
Adam DiCarlo <adam@onshored.com> writes:
> I'd like to eliminate the need for .dhelp files but I"M not sure if
> it's really correct to have dhelp using the doc-base files directly.
> E.g., what happens if I change the format?
Is the doc-base files' format likely to change? If not, I would
be happy to rely on them and recode the parser whenever it does
change, which would be a minor problem.
I'm not quite sure about package dependencies. Daniel
told me that we could easily solve incompatibilities of the
parser- file- pair through simple dependencies.
> I was looking to have a hook mechanism by which dhelp hooks into
> document registration, deregistration, and updating. This would be an
> executable that, say, takes some data in some format (either the
> filname for thge doc-base file in question, or else the document
> registration info on stdin or something.
> [...]
> Anyhow, this hook mechanism would mean that doc-base doesn't have to
> know about dhelp or anything -- it just triggers the hooks and that
> dhelp stuff is properly delegated out.
>From what I understand, doc-base itself is currently being
notified whenever a package installs or removes documents
from the system. (At least that should be the case.) Am
I right?
If that is the case, I agree with you. However, I lack of
ideas there... Will dhelp register itself with some script
(hook) upon installation - so that it will be notified by
doc-base without doc-base actually knowing that there is
a dhelp?
A further point would be my ambition to code dhelp fully in
Python.
Thanx,
--
Daniel
mailto:daniel.nouri@con-fuse.org
http://algorhythmus.con-fuse.org
______________________________________________________________________________
Erster Klick - SMS versenden, zweiter Klick - die Telefonnummer im
Adressbuch speichern bei: http://freemail.web.de/features/?mc=021151
Reply to: