From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Bill Wohler Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Shall we use etc/images more? Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:00:40 -0700 Organization: Newt Software Message-ID: <23150.1129485640@olgas.newt.com> References: <14536.1126060623@olgas.newt.com> <20721.1126158478@olgas.newt.com> <873bo9vree.fsf@olgas.newt.com> <7638.1128030339@olgas.newt.com> <11495.1128040804@olgas.newt.com> <27612.1129358734@olgas.newt.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1129485818 9582 80.91.229.2 (16 Oct 2005 18:03:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 18:03:38 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 16 20:03:36 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ERCpW-0007L0-Kd for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 20:01:55 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ERCpW-0005Ax-5M for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 14:01:54 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1ERCoR-0004nN-7O for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 14:00:47 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1ERCoQ-0004mX-9z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 14:00:46 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ERCoQ-0004m9-0m for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 14:00:46 -0400 Original-Received: from [207.69.195.72] (helo=pop-sarus.atl.sa.earthlink.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1ERCoO-0006NX-Rv; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 14:00:44 -0400 Original-Received: from h-68-166-188-126.snvacaid.dynamic.covad.net ([68.166.188.126] helo=olgas.newt.com) by pop-sarus.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #10) id 1ERCoN-0000vT-00; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 14:00:43 -0400 Original-Received: by olgas.newt.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 44C8C16FE1; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:00:40 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from olgas.newt.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olgas.newt.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 414FF16FB1; Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:00:40 -0700 (PDT) Original-To: rms@gnu.org In-Reply-To: "Richard M. Stallman"'s message of Sun, 16 Oct 2005 10:41:12 EDT. X-Mailer: MH-E 7.85+cvs; nmh 1.1; GNU Emacs 21.4.1 X-Image-URL: http://www.newt.com/wohler/images/bill-diving.png X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:44143 Archived-At: Richard M. Stallman wrote: > I'm not sure whether to move the lc-* (low resolution copies) images to > etc/images/lc or leave them as etc/images/lc*. Thoughts? > > The most natural thing would be to replace `lc-' with a suffix > or infix; instead of lc-foo.pbm, it would be foo-lc.pbm. > However, depending on the actual file names, that might cause > collisions on some systems. Indeed, the previous prefix was "locol", but that was changed to "lc" most likely for the reasons you cite. When I saw how many images were in etc/images, I opted to put these images in an "lc" sub-directory and strip the lc- prefix. Another advantage of this is that we gain three characters of uniqueness in the actual image names. This should allow for more descriptive names such as ones that Nick used in the gud directory. It also just occurred to me that we could now be more descriptive name in the directory name as well by using low-color instead of lc. What do you think? -- Bill Wohler http://www.newt.com/wohler/ GnuPG ID:610BD9AD Maintainer of comp.mail.mh FAQ and MH-E. Vote Libertarian! If you're passed on the right, you're in the wrong lane.