Re: Industrial in 2.10?

[Thomas Wood <thos gnome org>]

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.)

The benefits are that it creates a much saner dependency chain, and
prevents conflicts between modules trying to provide the same code (as
seen when the Smooth engine was put in gnome-themes-extras).

There are currently three modules in GNOME providing themes. They are
gnome-themes, gtk-engines and gnome-themes-extras. By separating out rc
files (user data) from engines (application code), it means that rather
than depending on each other, gnome-themes and gnome-themes-extras just
have to depend on gtk-engines for their code. This also makes installing
third party themes easier, since the user will no longer have to search
for individual engines.

The issue was discussed on gnome-themes-list in several threads, most
notably http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-themes-list/2004-
November/msg00016.html

gtk-engines had not really had much work for several years, so we're
hoping to bring some real improvements to some of the classic gtk
engines, plus adding some new ones (like industrial).

-Thomas