Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Uwe, I didn't do anythiing with your fonts stuff because I don't think
it should go on the same page as the UI language stuff and, more
importantly, becase I was unsure whether it was finished. Why don't
you start making patches against the stuff in CVS (BRANCH_1_3_X ;-))
and I'll start shoving it in.
It is too complicated for me as my script differs now so much from
yours. E.g. I don't use download.nsh etc. I've new scripts and
ini-files. It is easier for me to implement your changes.
But why can't we agree to an installer basis? I send my proposal to the
list and got three opinions:
Positive: Ansger, Peter Kümmel
Negative: You
That's why I changed my installer proposal but got no reply if you could
agree with it.
To be honest, I haven't tried it since the original proposal. I don't think
that our views are wildly different though, so there's hope ;-)
OK, here's what I propose: I'll merge in:
fonts
summary page
viewers
Then, the only remaining difference is how we deal with MinSYS,Python,Perl,
right?
I mean the first impression of a program is important, not too much but
enough to be not decided by only two persons.
Agreed. but having two development trees is just confusing us both. Let's
merge it all into a single set of sources and move forward.
I've just got rid of all CamelCase file names. Let's stick with
lower_case ones.
>
What's the advantage? It was you who started with "ioSummary.ini"
instead of "io_summary.ini". I just follow your scheme.
Consistency. (Yes, I'm a PITA sometimes ;-))
Angus
