On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:21 PM, Bastien ROUCARIES <roucaries.bast...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Hubert Chathi <uho...@debian.org> wrote: >> On Fri 30 Apr 2010 10:47:33 AM EDT, Fabian Greffrath <fab...@greffrath.com> >> wrote: >> >>> on a freshly installed Debian squeeze desktop system, ufraw appears in the >>> GNOME application menu (this is because inkscape, which is installed by >>> default, recommends imagemagick which in turn recommends ufraw). >> >> [...] >>> >>> Since the imagemagick maintainers consider the capability to edit raw >>> images based on ufraw a valuable feature and thus decided to keep on >>> recommending it, I'd like to suggest two possible ways how to reduce this >>> negative desktop experience: >>> 1) This icon gets disabled by default in the >>> /usr/share/applications/ufraw.desktop file (either globally or only in >>> GNOME) or >>> 2) this icon gets disabled by default in GNOME via a black-list (thus >>> CCing pkg-gnome team). >> >> No. Having it in the menu is valuable for those who do RAW processing. >> >> I'm not sure why ImageMagick is recommending a GUI tool. It would be better >> for it to either use dcraw for its raw processing (which is a command-line >> tool), or if they need to use ufraw-batch, then it may be best to split up >> ufraw-batch from the ufraw package. > > I believe we need only dcraw.
ufraw-batch will be better suited for pur needs. Could you please do the split ? Regards -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
