[PyKDE] PyQt4 installation issue

[Phil Thompson]

On Sunday 15 October 2006 11:45 am, Detlev Offenbach wrote:
> On Sunday 15 October 2006 12:16, Phil Thompson wrote:
> > On Sunday 15 October 2006 9:36 am, Detlev Offenbach wrote:
> > > On Saturday 14 October 2006 20:24, Phil Thompson wrote:
> > > > On Saturday 14 October 2006 6:17 pm, Detlev Offenbach wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > the latest snapshot of PyQt4 creates an API file for QScintilla.
> > > > > However, this file is not installed by "make install". For Linux I
> > > > > propose to put it in "/usr/share/QScintilla". Furthermore, the
> > > > > configure script should get an option to specify the installation
> > > > > path for the API file.
> > > > >
> > > > > -a dir  where the PyQt4 .api file will be installed
> > > > > [default /usr/share/QScintilla]
> > > >
> > > > I haven't decided yet how this should be handled. For example I might
> > > > create a Scintilla subdirectory in $QTDIR with lexer specific
> > > > subdirectories in that - and maybe autoload any API files found
> > > > there.
> > >
> > > Please no automatism. Give the user the chance to decide, if he wants
> > > to have autocompletion and calltips. If decides against it, it is not
> > > neccessary to load the API files. If you introduce a global API storage
> > > area, you must include provisions for a per user API storage area as
> > > well.
> > >
> > > > Or
> > > > maybe have an configurable API path that is searched.
> > >
> > > One per lexer type?
> > >
> > >
> > > What should happen, if a user just wants to load a subset of the API
> > > files available for a specific lexer (e.g. for Python there might be a
> > > python.api and PyQt4.api; the user just wants to use the later one).
> > > With the current API solution, it is the responsibility of the
> > > application to provide these services to the user. Eric4 (and eric3) do
> > > this. QScintilla2 is a widget meant to be integrated into an
> > > application and should provide the programmer an API to access the
> > > service needed. I think, the current QScintilla2 API is good in this
> > > respect.
> >
> > Agreed that QScintilla should not mandate any policy. Also, the producer
> > of any API file (eg, PyQt, PyKDE) should be decoupled from any consumer
> > (eg eric, another QScintilla based editor).
> >
> > How about, when loading an API file, if the file is not found and no
> > directory path was included in the name, then it looks for a file in a
> > standard location.
>
> Ok, how about a configurable API search path. This could be configurable
> via an environment variable (e.g. QSCINTILLA_API_PATH) and overridable via
> an API call (e.g. setApiSearchPath(QStringList searchPath)) accompanied by
> the relevant getter method.
>
> > There should also be a lexer method that returns the
> > names of the files (excluding the .api extension) of all the files in the
> > lexer specific standard directory.
>
> As mentioned before, if there is a global standard directory, there should
> be a per user standard directory as well.
>
> > That way, PyQwt could install a .api in a standard place.
>
> The install should offer to install into the standard directory, but that
> should be overridable by the user. For example, a user might want to
> install a package like PyQwt locally to test it or he has not the rights to
> install it globally. How does QScintilla know about the API file in that
> case?

Your dialog would have a check box for each file discovered in the standard 
directory and a way of selecting additional API files from anywhere in the 
file system.

I think the whole path thing is unnecessary over-engineering.

Phil