Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 00:51:18 -0800 From: Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com> To: Maxim Konovalov <maxim.konovalov@gmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, Kernel@dragonflybsd.org, tech-misc@netbsd.org Subject: Re: Objections to converting bsd-family-tree to a dot file Message-ID: <CAF6rxg=vqkjjDMD0G5yLu209VLYMQHs0%2Bwr_r0_QXz4KFL1_Qg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.20.1712151124140.95287@mp2.macomnet.net> References: <CAF6rxgken-%2BbrO-%2BsA-eWpFMb=tfTxSpuAuesCCRA1NtaN0_zg@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.20.1712151124140.95287@mp2.macomnet.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Show Me The Money! See examples at the bottom > How easy would it be to render something like the existing bsd-family-tree, e.g. something that is reasonably intelligent when viewed with more(1) or less(1) with the same basic information that it has now? Pretty easy. Examples below. Note its just a first draft. That said, I did find several unconnected nodes: some of which are corrected in this version. > Also, would rendering it be something that can reasonably be done while building the system, or would it need to be pre-rendered and the result checked into the SCM (keep in mind that NetBSD's build.sh is portable, i.e. you can build NetBSD on Windows if you feel like it)? It'll likely be easier to check it to the repo. It can be done reasonably portably using graphviz, but its not likely worth it. >> Any objections? It isn't used for much beyond documentation so >> changing the format isn't expected to cause any negative effects. >> > Today it is very simple plaintext thing. For me, the complexity will > overweight the value of this file. It isn't really complex: https://people.freebsd.org/~eadler/files/family-tree/by-hand-1.dot.txt https://people.freebsd.org/~eadler/files/family-tree/ -- Eitan Adler
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAF6rxg=vqkjjDMD0G5yLu209VLYMQHs0%2Bwr_r0_QXz4KFL1_Qg>