Re: Industrial in 2.10?

[Seth Nickell <snickell redhat com>]

> [luca redrum GNOME_HEAD]$ head gtk-engines/ChangeLog
> 2004-12-01  Thomas Wood <thos gnome org>, Andrew Johnson
> <ajgenius ajgenius us>
> 
>         * Update version to 2.5
>         * Remove pixbuf and notif engines, and misc other files
>         * Move crux, hc, industrial, mist, thinice engines over from
>           gnome-themes and gnome-themes-extras
>         * Replace configure.in with configure.ac

1) Dare I utter the F word? AFAIK, the gnome-themes maintainers were not
consulted about this change (I wasn't, but maybe Calum was). 

2) I don't see why this is a sensible change. Themes are not just a GTK
theme, or just an icon theme, etc. A theme is a combination of these
elements. Moving GTK engines into separate module would just be a pain.
It means you have to sync between modules. E.g. it means if we want to
create a new GNOME theme we have to coordinate between modules to get
the gtk-engine into the module, etc.

3) If somebody wants to actively fix bugs in the engines, etc, I would
welcome that and be happy to have them maintain the engines in the
module.

4) That the themes have not changed is partly a good thing. A blooming
of lots of themes is not a desirable situation. Its too stale to date.
At the point that I drew up the existing themes many of the great
options we have today were not available. But I still want
conservativism in adding new themes (or, e.g., remove a theme every time
you add one :-)

-Seth