Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

rarsa · Posted: Thu 01 Mar 2007, 00:21 Post subject: TkMines with a cleaned up UI

I had some time to spare and decided to tackle cleaning up a couple of tcl/tk applicaitions included in Puppy that had a rather old look.

I refrained from converting them to gnocl until it is included in the LiveCD so they still have the tk look, just a little bit cleaner.

Here is TkMines

Click the thumbnail to see the full size image

BarryK · Posted: Thu 01 Mar 2007, 21:28 Post subject:

Heh, heh, rarsa, as you already have pvolume and mixer using Gnocl,
I guess I'll put it into my own next Puppy! I don't know about the 2.15CE
core developers' plans for Gnocl though.

WhoDo · Posted: Thu 01 Mar 2007, 21:52 Post subject:

rarsa · Posted: Fri 02 Mar 2007, 01:28 Post subject:

Barry,

If I understood correctly your comments in other threads, you are now settling for GTK compliant toolkits as follows:

- gtkdialog for simple bash interfaces
- GINS for complex bash interfaces
- gnocl for Tcl interfaces

I find it consistent with the current LiveCD toolkits and making it explicit again may help aligning efforts.

BarryK · Posted: Sat 03 Mar 2007, 08:10 Post subject:

Rarsa, yes, but I have only included Gnocl because you are writing applets for it, and are keen on it, but I personally know nothing about Gnocl. I presume the Gnocl project is active?
Regarding murgaLua, I have asked a question about the runtime size on another thread (I haven't got back to that thread yet), but at this stage it would seem to be dispersing our
development environment too much.

WhoDo · Posted: Sat 03 Mar 2007, 16:53 Post subject:

JohnMurga · Posted: Sun 04 Mar 2007, 06:40 Post subject:

WhoDo · Posted: Sun 04 Mar 2007, 07:14 Post subject:

JohnMurga · Posted: Sun 04 Mar 2007, 07:42 Post subject:

amish · Joined: 24 Sep 2006 Posts: 616

i will say this. you know my stand on bloat. when a long time member of the community has developed a useful framework that is very small, within puppy, and has already been in puppy for sometime, i would sooner remove a tool that is not in current widespread use that is by someone else. that may not fit the description of anything in puppy right now.

on the other hand, with the work john did on murgalua, and mu did to get puppybasic in, i would be VERY unlikely to ever remove them. they *do* cater to a host of contributors, they *are* small, and they are not a single tool per se but the framework for many. on these criteria i would always lean towards their inclusion, i've registered my disappointment in removing murgalua from ce already... it's mild disappointment, but it's firm. i still appreciate that you are trying to remove bloat whodo- very much so, and i know some people are going to look for things they wish were included. and if it's really the best you can do, i am glad that it's at least in the office version... not that i personally think that's the best solution, but yeah better than nothing.

if you remove puppybasic too, it will simply be too hard to make small apps for puppy ce. i already tried to learn tcl/tk- EW. puppybasic is one of the best things that ever happened to puppy, it's even in mu's 12mb version.

although it would be a task (a task i wouldn't know how to do) it would be useful to have a list of what takes up how much, rather than have it come up in isolated debates about what to include. we could prioritize classes of what to keep and remove, and we could put "existing frameworks by community members" above "frameworks less in use that are not by members" i'm not saying we should all switch from gnocl to murgalua, that's not the point.