On 06-10-14 05:07, Nathan Woodrow wrote: > Hey all, > > I would like to get some opinions on how the currently QLR feature in > 2.4 works. Currently the QLR will have absolute paths if the project is > set to have them, or relative if the project is set in that mode. > I'm not sure I really like this as it's a bit magic with what you will > get and means you can't make a relative QLR from a absolute path based > project. > > Do you think this needs to be an option for each QLR when saving?
Hi Nathan, I think absoluth path projects and relative projects(!) have different use-cases. I prefer relative paths, but in organisations with one huge data-disk, maybe absoluth paths are preferable so project/qlr files can be moved around easily. My idea is that one of both is preferred by a user, so one of the options (relative/absolute) is more or less standard for that user. Adding an extra option to switch (for a non 'standard' situation) adds extra option stress. While if clearly documented (or shown in dialog) that a relative project breeds relative QLR files and vv can be enough? Then IF a user want a custom type of QLR he/she can create a temp project for it, change that to the preferred option and create a qlr with that.... So my stand: keep the dialogs simple (for most common use cases), especially as there is already a way to do the thing you want to keep an option for. See what others think of this. Regards, Richard Duivenvoorde _______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
