On Tue, 14 Aug 2012 10:37:46 +0200 Reinier Olislagers <reinierolislag...@gmail.com> wrote:
>[...] > The following is meant as constructive advice, not criticism: > Very well, how many people do you think use fpdoc *and* customize > fpdoc.css? I thought almost everyone does that. > Even then, copying fpdoc.css to the bin directory would give > a sensible default, no? If people want to customize it, replace it etc > they can then always do so. Please put only binaries into the bin. It might be in PATH. > If you want your fpdoc.exe usable from the bin directory, I'd just copy > over fpdoc.css during install. > > Now we've got 2 different behaviours: > - fpdoc in the source directory has fpdoc.css and will generate chm/html > files with it > - fpdoc in the bin directory doesn't have it. > In my view this difference in behaviour is unnecessary and only server > to needlessly further increase the complexity of the fpdoc system... Having two binaries with the same name is somewhat confusing. Mattias _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
