2017-11-05 18:39 GMT+01:00 PBKResearch <pe...@pbkresearch.co.uk>: > I don’t see why there is a flame potential here; I certainly won’t start a > flame war. My previous post was a bit heated, as a protest against the > abuse of language; removing a facility may make Pharo easier to maintain, > but it is not an enhancement for the user. I wasn’t aware that the theme is > broken; it seems to work well whenever I use it. > > > > It may be that I am the only one weird enough to continue with this theme > (which was the standard Pharo theme when I first met it). If so, I shall > have to accept the majority view. I shall keep a note of the .st package > you supplied, and try filing it in when I have to move on to Pharo 7. I > don’t think keeping it as an optional extra will really work. It will be an > orphan, because no-one other than the existing Pharo maintainers will have > the knowledge to maintain it. It will presumably only need maintenance if > there is some change in the superclass UITheme, and only those responsible > for the change will know where the consequential effects will be seen. > > > > There is one possibility which occurs to me. You have presumably > refactored the subclasses of UITheme, so that it no longer matters to the > other themes whether watery is present or absent. So you could file it in > again, marking it as deprecated and not to be maintained, and strange > people like me could use it at our own risk. When some other change occurs > which makes this theme irretrievably broken, perhaps in Pharo 8, 9 or 10, > it could then be deleted. > > > > Definitely no flame – just a serious suggestion of a compromise. > > > > Peter Kenny >
Hi Peter, there are some other themes that are managed externally and if there will be some issues with updating it to the latest Pharo versions, I'm sure that people will help if they will be kindly asked. The Watery theme is working in general but broken in many small details including the Spotter integration. One thing that newcomers try to do as first is to play with changing of themes and to provide them an inconsistent theme that emulates look of an OS that is not used anymore does not throw a favorable light on Pharo. Cheers, -- Pavel > > *From:* Pharo-users [mailto:pharo-users-boun...@lists.pharo.org] *On > Behalf Of *Pavel Krivanek > *Sent:* 05 November 2017 12:48 > *To:* Any question about pharo is welcome <pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> > *Subject:* Re: [Pharo-users] [Pharo7.0a] Next batch of enhancements > > > > Removing of the Watery theme is an enhancement in sense of "cleanup". The > code was not maintained and partly broken. To have this theme in the image > was a problem for management of the two default Pharo themes because the > Watery theme was superclass of them and added a significant level of > complexity and mess. > > > > But let's be positive. I can imagine that this thread has a huge flame > potential so I spent a few minutes to prepare Watery Theme as a standalone > package (see the attached *.st file). And no, it was not a simple file-out > operation. So I hope that people that want to use the Watery Theme will > rather discuss in what repository to place it and who will maintain it. In > Pharo we want to focus on two basic themes - one white and one dark. We > simply see no reason why this theme should not be an optional external > package. > > > > Cheers, > > -- Pavel > > > > > > 2017-11-05 12:00 GMT+01:00 PBKResearch <pe...@pbkresearch.co.uk>: > > I waded through the list of 'enhancements', and was astonished to find > this. Is there to be an alternative way of producing the same appearance as > the 'Watery' theme? If not, how can the removal of a facility be called an > 'enhancement'? I always switch to this theme when I load a new image, > because I find the plain buttons in the standard theme ugly. > > I managed to find the fogbugz entry - not easy, because it has been > closed, so clicking on the link gives 404 - and it just says 'UIThemeWatery > should be removed according to the current Pharo 7 plans.' I can't recall > seeing these plans put up for discussion; if I had, I would certainly have > protested then. Does having this theme as an option cause any problems > elsewhere, so as to justify removing a facility. If not, can I put in a > plea to have this so-called enhancement reverted? It has been installed > only a week ago, so it can't be a major problem. > > Peter Kenny > > -----Original Message----- > From: Pharo-users [mailto:pharo-users-boun...@lists.pharo.org] On Behalf > Of Stephane Ducasse > Sent: 05 November 2017 09:08 > To: Pharo Development List <pharo-...@lists.pharo.org>; Any question > about pharo is welcome <pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> > Subject: [Pharo-users] [Pharo7.0a] Next batch of enhancements > > Report period: 23 October 2017 to 5 November 2017 > > * 20587-remove-UIThemeWatery > >> https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/20587-remove-UIThemeWatery > > Issue URL: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/20587 > PR URL: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/395 > Diff URL: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/395/files > > Thanks to pavel-krivanek > > > > >
