> >> If there's a nice searchable .chm file, I wouldn't want a > >> thousand separate HTML files in addition. > > > > I'm a Windows user, and I tend to prefer using html docs. Am I unusual > > in this regard? > > You may be unusual, but you do have company. I find it hard to judge this, since I don't have a lot of experience with the .chm format. I think we can do an experiment: put the .chm files in the 2.3.1 release, and if everyone hates it (or if the BDFL hates it :-) we can roll it back in 2.3.2. (If there were an alpha/beta cycle for 2.3.1 tht would be the place to experiment, but as it seems there won't be, I'm fine with 2.3.1 itself being the beta cycle.) --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4