Michael:
> Martin and I agree that all the icons should be put into one place.
> The question is where. The original place identified for GUI icon sets
> was $GISBASE/etc/gui/icons. However, Martin points out that there is a
> real convenience factor for doc page creation to have them in $GISBASE/
> docs/html/icons. In either place, we should probably have a structure
> like ../icons/grass; ../icons/silk; ../icons/newgrass; etc.
>
> I have no problem with the $GISBASE/docs/html/icons location but
> wanted to see if there are any other considerations we should keep in
> mind as to where the GRASS 7 icon archive should live.
IMO $GISBASE/docs/html/icons seems very a strange place to put them,
while $GISBASE/etc/icons seems very natural. Their primary reason for existence
is for the GUI program, the docs are reactionary to that..
note that some packagers (Debian...) will, for large softwares, split the docs
from the main program package into a new -docs package. this is for a couple
reasons- one is that some people (eg embedded, old hardware) want to save the
disk space by not installing unneeded docs; another is to avoid redundancy on
the package download servers by pushing as much platform-neutral data into a
single "-any" package and then have a series of smaller -i386, -arm, -mips,
etc. binary packages. Storing 11 copies of the same docs adds up when you
support 11 hardware platforms.
The icons are platform neutral so not a problem for the server-space reason,
but very much a problem for the user wants "core only" reason.
2c
Hamish
_______________________________________________
grass-dev mailing list
grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
