Am 12.04.2017 um 17:51 schrieb mn <mno...@gmx.net>: > > On 12.04.17 16:13, Stephan Witt wrote: >>>>>>>> What are some of the present bugs / missing features you're >>>>>>>> referring to? I wonder if some workarounds are available... >>>>> - that apparently almost nobody was interested in reducing the filesize >>>>> of the shipped images. >>>
… > >>> PNG could and should be recompressed right now, in git. It's lossless >>> and the final visible image is just identical. They remain editable >>> (since this was a concern a while ago) > >> We are talking about 268 files with 1141222 bytes. > > Which can be stored and transmitted more efficiently for almost no cost. > And that cost is a one time effort. > (repeated at shipping time, for svg). SVGs are already compressed. What procedure do you propose at shipping time? > >>> SVGs lose (some of) the editing capability, so maybe that needs to be >>> done only for shipping pictures/icons not those "originals" in the dev-tree. >>> For SVGs it is precisely the one step before copying them onto the dmg >>> where I see the reduction to be placed best. >> >> I don’t understand - the SVGs are in fact svgz files… except one clipart >> file. > > Their internal structure can be cleaned up and the z-level increased. > See my post from October last year. Perhaps, this is not my turn. I read about it and it’s some work I don’t know how to do. I’ll left this as an exercise for others. > >>> - that the download and installation size of LyX is generally really huge >>>> Yes, 120 MByte. >>>> Leaving out the spell checker dictionaries will save approximately >>>> 200 MByte on your disk resp. 50 MByte for the disk image. > >>>>> -- because it ships all language files at once >>>>> (this is slightly different with e.g. LibreOffice) > >>>> This is because there is no language add-on package download concept for >>>> LyX. >>>> But it may be an option to provide a „pure“ LyX-package for those ones >>>> using >>>> native spell checker only. > >>> I second that. >>> Now I do not know how this is handled on Windows, but I strongly prefer >>> an English only build that has an easy way to extend it with language >>> capabilities. > >> There is no coincidence with Windows here. >>> But I need it just for document languages not the UI. >> This is a matter of your TeX installation. > > What I meant there: spellchecking and the like from within in LyX. > And I do not know how all that is handled on windows. Again, we’re talking about Mac packaging. Not Windows and not Linux. > On linux sometimes there are independently installable language packages. > Having that kind of support, to download and extend the languages to be > worked with from within the app would be the most convenient. As I said already - there is no concept for doing this in a safe and clean way with the LyX application. Outside the application I don’t know of some concept for this on Mac. We’re not talking about package managers and the like. LyX is and should stay a self-contained package, IMO. … >>>> >>>> I don’t think there are any superfluous Qt frameworks bundled. But I’ll >>>> check that. In any case I’m not sure it makes a big difference. >>>> >>> >>> As I said, I am neither sure they are superfluous nor convinced LyX >>> needs e.g. multimedia-frameworks or DBus-support on OS X. >> >> The internal dependencies of Qt I cannot change. You’re speculating here. >> > > Hm, yeah. As I said. But speculating with reason: > > Deleting most of the qt-plugins, and frameworks, like those I mentioned > and audio and dbus and so on: LyX launches, works, does everything I > routinely do. > > Now I thought it maybe that I missed some usage scenario (like > lyx-server and the like) that I just didn't use. Let’s see how it goes. Stephan > > But this way, I doubt if they are really all necessary. > If I delete GUI-framework or image-plugins, then it's in trouble, but > playlist-support, camera, gestures?
