Re: [Geany-devel] Geany-Plugins: Having just one copy of GPL inside source tree / Waf size

2010-08-25 Thread Frank Lanitz
Hey, 

On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 19:47:26 +0200
Enrico Tröger enrico.troe...@uvena.de wrote:

 On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 17:14:54 +0100, Nick wrote:
 
 On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 01:49:36 +0200
 Frank Lanitz fr...@frank.uvena.de wrote:
 
  during the work on Updatecheker I recognized another time that
  nearly every plugin is having its own copy of GPL. As most of the
  plugins code is licensed under GPL2+, what do you think of moving
  the individual copies of GPL into a central, geany-plugins-License
  as
 
 Then you would have to maintain a list of the plugins with the
 licenses they use.

Not sure. I think when using GPL only (and from my understanding all
plugins are currently inside geany-plugins) are currently maintained
and distributed under terms of GPL2+ so a list wouldn't be needed.
Nevertheless I understand you concerns behind and agree that if might
not yet, but maybe in future the overhead on during some license stuff
will significant increase when establishing something like that. 

 If the GPL copies are virtually the same I guess they won't take
 space when they're compressed.
 
 I agree.
 First of all, all the license files are plain ASCII text which can be
 really good compressed. And as Nick said, since those files are the
 same, the compression ratio should be even higher.
 Additionally, compared to the rest of all the contents, the license
 files might not be the biggest factor.

I've got the feeling that I cannot agree for 100% here as most of
compression tools are working with fixed value bitstreams IIRC. But
nevertheless, in genreal you are right, so we should keep it as it is. 

 Also what if an author wanted to distribute their plugin separately?
 
 Also agree.

Basically this I don't see as a valid argument, as if a developer is
really planning to do so he will need to build up its own build system.
Adding a copy of GPL will be the simplest task during this. 

However, based on the points I think maybe its really better to keep it
as it is. 

 Cheers, 
Frank 
-- 
http://frank.uvena.de/en/


pgpENF5O2k0Oq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Geany-devel mailing list
Geany-devel@uvena.de
http://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel


Re: [Geany-devel] [PATCH 09/19] Use wider entry for project file path

2010-08-25 Thread Jiří Techet
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 13:57, Nick Treleaven
nick.trelea...@btinternet.com wrote:
 On Thu,  5 Aug 2010 01:59:43 +0200
 Jiří Techet tec...@gmail.com wrote:


 30 is too little. For instance

 /home/techet/projects/geany/geany.geany

 is 39 characters long and this is really short path. I find 50
 characters to be about minimal usable size so users do not have
 to scroll inside the edit box too often.

 50 makes the dialog seem too wide IMO. The user can stretch the dialog
 as well as scroll the entry. I don't like forcing the entry to be at
 least 50 characters wide, I wouldn't mind so much if it displays as 50
 so long as the screen can take it, but could be reduced by GTK or
 the user if necessary.

I agree the dialog looks better with not so wide entries, on the other
hand I *always* have to scroll the entry to be able to edit the path
at the end. But I don't care so much about the future of this patch,
it's just a minor usability problem I have noticed.

Jiri


 Regards,
 Nick
 ___
 Geany-devel mailing list
 Geany-devel@uvena.de
 http://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel

___
Geany-devel mailing list
Geany-devel@uvena.de
http://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel