On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 03:05:41PM -0800, Guy Harris wrote:
>
> On Jan 15, 2012, at 1:59 PM, jmayer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> > http://anonsvn.wireshark.org/viewvc/viewvc.cgi?view=rev&revision=40518
> >
> > User: jmayer
> > Date: 2012/01/15 01:59 PM
> >
> > Log:
> > Move gtk to ui/gtk.
>
> Should those files in the top-level images directory that are only used by UI code be moved a ui/images directory?
>
> A quick scan of the source finds a bunch of includes of XPM files from ui/gtk/*.c files; I'm guessing that they - the .xpm files - would only be used by UI code, making them candidates to be moved.
>
> I'm not sure where the .png files are used - are they used as source to generate files such as ui/gtk/expert_indicators.h? If so, they'd be candidates as well. (And, if so, what tool is used to generate them?)
>
> The same applies for expert_indicators.svg.
>
> Should anything used only by packaging/installer tools be put into packaging/images or, if they're specific to a particular package type/installer, an images subdirectory or the top-level directory for that packaging/installer tool?
Moving the .xpms into ui/ makes sense to me. I'm not sure whether separating
the different image type is useful, but from a usage point of view moving the
relevant files to packaging/images/ sounds better to me - hmm, or not: If
icons/pictures are used in more than one place, we will run into consistency
problems - iff they are used in more than one place.
And eventually tshark should probably go into ui/text/ as well as all the
non-interactive text tools like editcap, dumpcap etc.
But I will call it a day (or night) for now.
Ciao
Jörg
--
Joerg Mayer <jmayer@xxxxxxxxx>
We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that
works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology.
