Re: [Fwd: gnome-themes branched for 2.10]



Il giorno lun, 07/03/2005 alle 16.00 +0000, Thomas Wood ha scritto:

> Now that this is branched, would it be a good time to try putting
> Industrial in?

It could be interesting.

> Anyway, it's definitely the time for discussion as to what is included
> for 2.12. We need discussion on this list rather than letting people
> make a lot of unhelpful noise on d-d-l.


Well, just a brainstorming of long and short term tasks:
     1. put Clearlooks engine in gtk-engines, enabling progress bar
        animation :-)
     2. use a well-fitted-for-l10n/i18n name for Clearlooks entry in
        theme selector capplet
     3. remove some icon option from gnome-themes (or at least remove
        gnome-fs-regular image keeping only the folder icon: see for
        example Crux)
     4. provide 3 control options for each engine; i.e. Simple-Green,
        Simple-Blue, and Simple-Red so users will have the ability to
        change the color scheme of their desktops keeping the
        appearance. Maybe the same color scheme for each provided
        engine.
     5. add a full icon theme, maybe something breaking the GNOME
        palette and "soft" like Aqua or Crystal. Of course this means
        provide a LOT of pixmaps.
     6. add a "Kids" theme, something attractive for 8 years old
        users ;-) Do you remember Copland screenshots? 
     7. ask theme creators to avoid inclusion of stock icons in gtkrc
     8. port accessibility icon themes from gtkrc to icon theme
     9. convert high contrast icons to SVG (jimmac should have some of
        those icons yet ready)
    10. include some gtk+ stock icons in g-i-t (see
        http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=167446 )
    11. maybe spit g-t in g-t-pleasure and g-t-accessibility
    12. add Industrial cursor theme to g-i-t and enable it
        in /desktop/gnome/peripherals/mouse/cursor_theme Gconf key
    13. add a gnome-fs-computer icon in g-i-t. Currently we are using
        gnome-fs-client for Computer desktop icon: this is bad.


More detail about points 3 and 5 will come. 




[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]