Hi Astron,
Stefan Knorr (Astron) píše v Čt 09. 08. 2012 v 10:24 +0200:
Terribly sorry for missing your mail :-( Can you please describe me the
problem more exactly? I can see the images, when I go eg. to
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/tree/icon-themes/tango/lc10713.png
and click "(plain)" after the "blob:
c18733cf1528e91ee4a60f6896d1c1d4fdd422a8", it opens correctly for me in
the eog.
Right, that's not as bad as I thought (maybe someone has changed
that..? dunno, really), just: wouldn't it be better, if the images
opened in the browser without me having to download them/open them in
a different app?
I've just looked at a cgit installation that I have here (different to
the fdo), and clicking "(plain)" opens it directly in the browser; I
think the following in my cgitrc does that:
mimetype.git=image/git
mimetype.html=text/html
mimetype.jpg=image/jpeg
mimetype.jpeg=image/jpeg
mimetype.pdf=application/pdf
mimetype.png=image/png
mimetype.svg=image/svg+xml
The best is probably to file a bug in the fdo bugzilla against
infrastructure, in order to have this there.
For sure it is not the most user-friendly way, but hopefully good for a
start?
Yes, having the image directly on the page without having to click
"plain" would probably help tremendously. Is that possible with cgit
at all?
You can extend the cgit behavior via shell scripts it seems, like
http://hjemli.net/git/cgit/tree/filters/syntax-highlighting.sh
So I guess reasonably easy, if cgit sends the binary data to this filter
too, and if fdo admins allow us to install such a custom script on the
server.
And then, can we try moving the repository idea forward?
Sounds great to me - I'd be for an additional subdir in the core
repository wherever you choose; the rest of the artwork is there already
anyway...
That would be quite the economic idea. :) So, well, if you developers
don't mind designers committing to there regularly...
It is preferred that you commit directly there. Ie. not only we don't
mind, but welcome that :-)
On the other
hand, the artwork repository might occasionally use different licenses
from the rest of LibreOffice (i. e. CC etc.) and therefore it might be
good to have it separate (?).
That would indeed make the separate repo the preferred option; OTOH I
hope that for such important stuff as the main branding is, we could
agree on the same license as the rest of LibreOffice? :-)
All the best,
Kendy
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.