On 8/10/20 2:23 pm, Joel Sherrill wrote: > On Wed, Oct 7, 2020, 8:12 PM Chris Johns <chr...@rtems.org > <mailto:chr...@rtems.org>> wrote: > On 8/10/20 12:04 pm, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 7, 2020, 8:01 PM Chris Johns <chr...@rtems.org > <mailto:chr...@rtems.org> > > <mailto:chr...@rtems.org <mailto:chr...@rtems.org>>> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > In an update of my rtems-docs.git repo I noticed some new image > source > formats: > > > > $ find . -name \*.dot > > ./images/eng/bld-bsp.dot > > ./images/eng/bld-deps2.dot > > ./images/eng/bld-bsp2.dot > > ./images/eng/bld-deps.dot > > > > Do we have a policy on what image source types can be used? Any > additional image > > source needs to support FreeBSD and Linux. > > > > Images can be difficult to get right so I understand there is a > need for > > flexibility and tolerance but I think we need to consider how we > manage the > > process and quality so we maintained high quality documentation. For > example on > > my desktop I cannot read the HTML `bld-deps.png` and clicking on it > loads a > > small image which is clearer but small. The page is ... > > > > > > https://docs.rtems.org/branches/master/eng/build-system.html#build-specification-items > > > > The PDF view looks OK. > > > > I can see we have as image source the following extensions: > > > > .puml > > .ditaa > > .svg > > .dot > > .odg > > > > Some formats are old and imported so we live with those but maybe > we need > > tickets to have them move to something that is simpler to maintain. > > > > I see generated .png and .pdf for some images which I am questioning > we need. > > The user document images I have contributed are only .png files so I > am not sure > > why a PDF is needed for some. > > > > How are the .dot image sources converted to the required output > format(s)? I > > cannot see any information on what to do, what packages I need to > install and > > the options I need. For the puml and ditaa source I contributed I > added waf > > support, tested on Linux and FreeBSD and update the top level doco. > > > > > > Graphviz. > > Thanks but I was hoping for something a little more specific, like a `pkg > install ...` command and a command line to run. I think it is important > when > wanting to maintaining quality. :) > > That is the name of the package. May vary with upper or lower case. CentOS RPM > is graphviz.
I am sure it is something like that on FreeBSD. I have not looked. > Are there any figures we do not appear to have source for? Or they aren't in > an > open format? I thought we had killed all those in our last Google Code In. Good question, I think there are some I did a long time ago that might need to be redone. The svg ones. I have not checked. > > > > If you can build Doxygen with graphics, you should have dot. We want dot > for sure. > > > > Sure, happy to be dot source integrated and managed. > > I surprised one of my sons by using dot to show them the dependency graph for > them to graduate on time. Coloured nodes based on semester offered and could > visually identify longest sequence of courses and which had no prerequisites > left for him. That is such a nerd Dad solution! Well done, I love it :) > PlantUML can draw more types of figures and they often look better but it can > embed dot. OK, I have not used dot so I do not know. The concern is not so much the tool but the options used to make something work and be just right. We need to capture what is used. Chris _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
