On Wed, Feb 19, 2003, Adam McDaniel wrote: > I agree, but I was thinking about just checking in the compiled .bin > codewarrior spits out as the resource.
I would still have to say no, because there shouldn't be any "code" that can only be handled if you have access to a non-free tool. > I was reading in throughout the code in pilrc in how it compiles > fonts, and altering it to support extended fonts (aka double-density) > doesn't look all too difficult. Well, when there is a free tool (that also must run on Linux) that supports double-density fonts then they can be inlcuded in Plucker, too. > The inclusion of the .bin would only be a temporary measure until > pilrc official supports this anyways. Temporary measures have a tendency to become anything but "temporary." You have to understand my view on this; if there is a bug somewhere in the viewer I want to be able to fix it. However, if we start to include stuff that can only be handled by using non-free tools (probably also only running on Windows) then I can't do that... /Mike _______________________________________________ plucker-dev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.rubberchicken.org/mailman/listinfo/plucker-dev
