* Tomas Vondra ( wrote:
> My impression from that thread was that one of the requirements is
> reasonable versioning / diff support, and AFAIK that's not a good match
> for any GUI-based product. So while I like dia and I used it for drawing
> the charts I submitted today, I don't think it works with this (quite
> reasonable) requirement.

I'm not sure why you feel that way wrt dia..?  As was pointed out in the
thread, if you decompress the dia, it's pretty reasonable XML and diffs,
etc, will work reasonably well with it.

> > Also, for my part, I'd suggest putting it on the wiki initially anyway,
> > as then it can be seen directly (load it as a png or what-have-you) and
> > it becomes immediately available to users.  The .dia should also be on
> > the wiki, of course, and then included in the PG tree eventually if it's
> > added as part of the official docs.
> No problem with that, but I'd like to know in advance if we're willing to
> put that into the docs / under what requirements etc. Otherwise it might
> result in a major effort just to get it from wiki into docs later.

I can't see it being a major effort to get it from the wiki into the
docs, though perhaps I'm being a bit over-optomistic wrt that.  Still,
I'd much rather have it somewhere than not have it at all...



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to