<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><div>On Aug 24, 2009, at 9:02 AM, William Kyngesburye wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div><blockquote type="cite"><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#144FAE"><br></font></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><blockquote type="cite">One possibility would be to completely remove the GRASS plugin from the all-in-one Qgis. Then it won't even try to load it and crash. The readme would point people to the full framework-based Qgis if they need GRASS support.<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">+1<br></blockquote><blockquote type="cite">This seems like a good idea. I'm wondering how useful it is for those needing to save bandwidth to have to download an application that is 200mb (all-in-one with grass)? At 160mb, it's bad enough. That includes all the qt-frameworks, correct? So, either way, there is no dependency on qt.<br></blockquote><br><br>That's 200 for GRASS + 160 for QGIS + 120 for frameworks. (that's installed sizes, download sizes ~40%)<br></div></blockquote></div><br><div>Ouch! Obviously no advantage for the bandwidth conscious users.</div><div><br></div><div>John</div></body></html>