Re: Sudden Tango changes in trunk

[Michael Natterer <mitch gimp org>]

On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 16:34 +0100, Martyn Russell wrote:
> Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 16:38 +0200, Kristian Rietveld wrote:
> >> On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 12:49:44PM +0200, Jakub Steiner wrote:
> > [...]
> >> The concern which I want to raise, and which I already did in my
> >> previous mail, is the following: "Does updating icons account as a
> >> break of backward compatibility?".  Running a GTK+ application which
> >> has some custom drawn icons with the new stock icons, might make those
> >> custom icons look out of place.  A GTK+ application which is putting a custom
> >> drawn "overlay" on a new stock icon might look out of place.  And, for
> >> example Gossip, is using the gtk-justify-left icon as an icon for the
> >> "View Previous Conversations" menu item -- this might also break with a
> >> new stock icon which is using a different metaphor to communicate the
> >> intention of the item to the user.  Or is using a stock item for a
> >> different action as intended seen as a misuse of the API?  I am sure
> >> Gossip is not the only application doing this.
> > 
> > FWIW, I think its better for everyone if that would be considered a
> > misuse of the api - I dont think gtk+ makes any gauruntees about
> > what a "next" or "apply" icon will look like, changing these icons
> > on a regular basis can even help teach applications to be more
> > diligent in thier use of the api.
> 
> I too consider it to be a misuse, but I think Kris is right, I can
> imagine a lot of developers are doing the same thing and this would
> upset them and may cause excess work unnecessarily.
> 
> If we are being so stringent on API/ABI breakage, how can we just change
> icon sets so callously?

Because icons are not part of any API or ABI. Their names are, but their
appearance isn't. And about icon abuse, I strongly hope we're only
into the bit-for-bit compatibility business, not into the bug-for-bug
one ;)

ciao,
--mitch