Brendan Lally wrote: > On 1/29/06, Mark Wedel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> I would suggest the following mappings (for both binaries and package names) >>> crossedit -> crossedit >> Arguably, crossedit should just disappear. This, however, may become more >> or >> less an issue depending on other changes (if a code restructuring means >> significant rewrites needed for crossedit, I could see more reason to get >> rid of >> it. OTOH, if that major rewrite makes it cleaner, then maybe more compelling >> reason to keep crossedit, or make a gtk replacement). > > The problem is that at the moment there is no real replacement for > crossedit (CFJavaEditor doesn't work well enough, it doesn't even have > undo support).
This is perhaps a problem. But then I think we need to figure out what our editor story is. If it is that the java editor is the official editor, these bugs should be reported and fixed up. I do agree that the fact it is in java and not C probably doesn't help things a great deal in terms of java competency of some of the programmers (me included). > > > The thing with this is that currently all distro packages are called > crossfire-client or crossfire-client-gtk. If I am on a debian (or > similar) system and install a program, I always try and run it using > the name of the package, only if that fails do I bother to grep the > filelist for bin/, sometimes if it is something I don't care about, > then I ignore it and find something else to do the job instead. > > having the binary being tab-completable from the start of the package > name is a good thing, especially when the .desktop files aren't > installed properly. Have to admit, I've not looked at what other packages do in terms of program names vs package names. >> Perhaps have a generic crossfire-client script that looks for the different >> programs and tries to run the 'best' one available. > > I'd be interested to know how 'best' would be determined there. Probably basically in this order: gcfclient (still most complete) gtkv2-client (not complete, but still usable, and probably more complete/featureful than) cfclient - last resort really, and it doesn't provide much in the way of UI, and I think is still limited in terms of graphics and map size. _______________________________________________ crossfire mailing list crossfire@metalforge.org http://mailman.metalforge.org/mailman/listinfo/crossfire