Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 16 Dec 2017 11:49:49 -0800 (PST)
From:      "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net>
To:        Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com>
Cc:        Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon@orthanc.ca>, FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, tech-misc@netbsd.org, Kernel@dragonflybsd.org
Subject:   Re: Objections to converting bsd-family-tree to a dot file
Message-ID:  <201712161949.vBGJnnMR008332@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAF6rxgnma1ntnMONbbk0joMaQC5NkkEEZ2ze7uCubj%2B_DLyrrA@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 15 December 2017 at 08:43, Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon@orthanc.ca> wrote:
> >> I'd like to turn this into into a dot file
> > Sounds like a reasonable idea.  With care, the source (text) file(s) can
> > often be formatted in a way that's at least semi-readable. I assume this
> > would ship with pregenerated images (PDF, SVG) so people don't have to
> > install the port to render the graph?
> 
> 
> The overall consensus seems to be: so long as there is a reasonable
> way to view this file in plaintext without requiring a tool in base,
> its fine. I'll likely run with that after ironing out the conversion
> bit.

I have seen no presentation of a reasonable way to view the
graph in plain text.   Nor do I find the output you presented
as a sample very usable due to scaling issues, one of the graphs
was massively wide, the other was ok but at such a scale had
to be zoomed significantly to read.

Though they are "pretty" I find them cumbersumb to use.  And that
means they wont be used.

-- 
Rod Grimes                                                 rgrimes@freebsd.org



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201712161949.vBGJnnMR008332>