Hi On Wed, 2006-07-26 at 12:50 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: > Hi; > > On Wed, 2006-07-26 at 12:29 +0100, Alex Jones wrote: > > Hi Davyd > > > > Interesting to see that approach to portraying disk usage. Personally, > > however, I feel that anyone really wanting this kind of software would > > probably prefer to use something like Graphical Disk Map > > <http://gdmap.sourceforge.net/>. > > Treemap view is supported by Baobab too, but it's not its major feature > - which is a nice integration with Nautilus and (now) with the Search > tool.
The treemap in GDMap really is much more usable. Perhaps we should port the logic. I think they call it a cushioned treemap or something, because it manages to make squares (as best it can), not rectangles! As a result, you don't see thick black lines all over the place where a file's representation is of proportions 40:1. Also the colouring is much easier to analyse. Each colour in GDMap represents a file type, so you can see if you have a massive folder of videos somewhere very easily! Just some ideas... > > As an outsider to this whole process, though, I'm not sure I totally > > understand why applications have to be bundled into packages of vaguely > > related software like this. Can't distributions make their own minds up? > > First, do read the thread about the inclusion of Baobab: > > http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2006-April/msg00112.html > > The decision to add it to gnome-utils was due to the fact that Baobab is > a little utility, with a code base small enough not to require its own > package (it did have its own package, though, as it was already shipped > by Ubuntu and Debian before the inclusion); it was also actively > maintained at the time of inclusion (the latest release of gdmap is > dated December 2005). > > The GNOME Utilities package is a small package that GNOME has kept since > the 1.x era (and before); it provides some application other than > baobab, like the screenshoter, the file search dialog, the dictionary > and the system log viewer, that are not sufficiently big to warrant > their own package but at the same time are considered part of the basic > offering of GNOME itself. I understand. Thanks > Ciao, > Emmanuele (gnome-utils co-maintainer). > -- Alex Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
