RFC: KDevelop4 icons, what do we want/need?

[Matthew Woehlke]

Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> On 30.01.07 12:00:35, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
>> Andreas Pakulat wrote:
>>> On 30.01.07 18:35:11, Jakob Petsovits wrote:
>>>> I really think we should keep automake specific icons to the absolute minimum.
>>>> I'm working on a modified version, please don't submit your icon request yet.
>>> Too late jakob. BTW what was automake related in that list? Even plain
>>> Makefiles have a target item, so a build-target-icon is not specific to
>>> automake.
>> Hmm, 'distclean', 'run configure' and 'run autotools'? ;-)
> 
> distclean exists at least for qmake projects too. configure could point
> to running cmake or even running ccmake in a terminal. qmake or custom
> makefile projects might have a configure script too.
> 
> autotools is the only one that really belongs to autotools.

Ok, I'm (as you can probably tell :-)) not familiar with cmake ATM. 
Incidentally, these are the sorts of things that should be added to that 
doc. :-)

(In this case the "addition" is of course expansion/clarification. IIRC 
the ideas I'd given were suitably generic to cover the cmake versions of 
the actions as you noted them, and it is /always/ good to increase the 
generic-usefulness of an icon.)

-- 
Matthew
"I like to think of it as 'unplanned dissonance'" -- A fellow chorister