Re: background/font capplets

[Seth Nickell <snickell stanford edu>]

I have a patch for the background capplet, which appears to be working
today, though every week or so I end up having merge conflicts and have
to go fix things again (sigh). You'll have to rebuild libbackground and
the capplet (and copy the libbackground changes to Nautilus and
recompile that if you are using Nautilus, as this also fixes the
schemas).

http://beauty.stanford.edu/bg_patch

Zaphod & I are actively working on the font capplet, no fears, I think
that will get fixed up.

-Seth

On Mon, 2002-03-11 at 11:01, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I think it's important that we get better background/font capplets for
> 2.0. I don't know the detailed story but apparently people have
> written the improved capplets. There's also apparently a better set of
> background schemas, and these MUST go in before 2.0 if they are going
> to change.
> 
> If we're going to get things in for 2.0, they need to go in _NOW_, at
> least the UI, strings, and schemas do; some code cleanup can come
> later, but we need the UI, strings, and schemas so that other modules
> and teams can coordinate.
> 
> So I don't know what the whole long saga is about why this stuff is
> not in, etc., but can people please make a concerted effort to get the
> stuff in CVS ASAP. Plenty of the stuff in GNOME 2 is a bit broken or
> suboptimal, but as long as the rough overall shape of something is
> right, it needs to go in CVS sooner rather than later, so that other
> people hacking on GNOME 2, writing docs, translations, etc. can
> adapt. We need to sync Nautilus with the schemas for example.
> 
> Specifically why I think these need changing:
> 
>  - the font capplet has only one control in it and looks dumb, and 
>    is not instant apply; it should let us change the window titlebar
>    font in addition to the GTK font, be instant apply, and get some 
>    assistance on overall appearance. It's just completely lame 
>    at the moment.
>  
>  - the background capplet is much uglier and less usable than Seth's 
>    very nice version. It definitely needs some UI help.
> 
>  - I haven't looked at the schemas, just going on hearsay, 
>    but again if they are going to change it needs doing soon.
> 
> Can people please take care of this? There is no good reason that I
> see to ship GNOME 2 with inferior capplets in these two areas.
> Let's just fix it.
> 
> Havoc
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> desktop-devel-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list