Re: Industrial in 2.10?

[Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller <uraeus linuxrising org>]

Well Thomas (thos) and Andrew (ajgenius) seems be taking on
maintainership of gtk-engines so I guess it is re-maintained. Question
of course is if we want a separate engines package or if all engines
should go into gnome-themes. Since my package gnome-themes-extras use
booth Smooth and Industrial I would need to depend on whichever package 
includes it, but it doesn't really matter to me which one (as I don't
see a scenario where someone want to have just g-t-e installed and not
g-t).

I guess one advantage of the split between themes and engines is that
thos and ajgenius can hack freely on the engines then without risking to
hamper theme developers releasing new versions due to temporary engine
instabilities in CVS.

On the other hand I feel we are getting a little overboard in GNOME with
making everything a separate package which do create extra
work/complexity for both packagers and for crazy nuts who build from
source themselves; so this speaks for the everything into g-t approach.

Christian

On Fri, 2004-12-03 at 20:55 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> <quote who="Link Dupont">
> 
> > There are major changes to gtk-engines under way. Might want to talk to
> > Thomas & Andrew about this. Plans are to move most of the commonly used
> > GTK+ engines into gtk-engines. I'd suggest moving industrial into
> > gtk-engines, and have the gtkrc in gnome-themes. Does this make sense?
> > Separate the engine from the theme? Since the module gtk-engines exists we
> > might as well put GTK+ engines in it, and put GNOME themes into the
> > gnome-themes module.
> 
> gtk-engines is regarded as deprecated and unmaintained by the GTK+ team, as
> noted on the Desktop suite page. It would probably be better if gnome-themes
> continued on as-is. (I don't see much benefit splitting up rc files from
> engines.)
> 
> - Jeff
>