Re: Application specific themable icons

[Rodney Dawes <dobey novell com>]

This got sent before I was finished. Sorry about that. Butterfingers.


On Sat, 2007-01-13 at 20:13 +0300, Nickolay V. Shmyrev wrote: 
> Since I've now meet this problem in evince bug 
> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=386226
> let me complain about new way too. For other complains one can also read
> http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2006-January/msg00302.html 
> http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2006-February/msg00024.html
> http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2006-July/msg00797.html
> as Luca kindly mentioned. 
> 
> Looking at Epiphany specific icons I don't quite understand why "download" or "bookmark-view" 
> is Epiphany specific icon. Also I don't understand why quite ugly looking icon for 
> sidebar should be evince specific.

Because these icons are specific to epiphany. We don't have desktop-wide
bookmarks, that integrate all the various types. The bookmarks in
epiphany, are quite different from those in nautilus, which may be
different from those shown in the file chooser. Download I admit, is not
specific to epiphany. In fact, download and save are the same action, and
should not have different icons. However, I'm sure plenty of people will
also disagree with that, hence the reason that epiphany seems to need a
download icon.

> I dislike the need to install all icons into ${datadir}/hicolor/... and don't see how it
> will improve consistent look of the desktop. I understand that it's hard to maintain large
> set of icons in gnome-icon-theme, but nobody tells maintaince is an easy thing. So if you'd
> like to have small subset, you can just split icon-theme in two packages - maintained and
> unmaintained one.

So applications will have to depend on the "extra" package, to even be
functional? I don't think so. Nobody wants that.

-- dobey