Re: Clarius
Em Sáb, 2006-09-02 às 00:43 +0200, Josselin Mouette escreveu: > Le mardi 29 août 2006 à 18:20 -0300, Evandro Fernandes Giovanini a > écrit : > > Clearlooks is still available, it's installed by the gtk-engines > > package. > > How about the metacity theme? > The metacity theme never changed. A Clarius gtk theme was created, and the Clearlooks metatheme was modified to use it instead of the Clearlooks gtk theme. This has been reverted now so 2.16 won't have the Clarius theme. Cheers, Evandro ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Clarius
Le mardi 29 août 2006 à 18:20 -0300, Evandro Fernandes Giovanini a écrit : > Clearlooks is still available, it's installed by the gtk-engines > package. How about the metacity theme? I'm all with Shaun's rant. This is the kind of thing that makes upgrades difficult. I'll have to provide compatibility symlinks in gnome-themes 2.16 to avoid a mess for people upgrading. -- .''`. Josselin Mouette/\./\ : :' : [EMAIL PROTECTED] `. `'[EMAIL PROTECTED] `- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom signature.asc Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Clarius
On Wed, 2006-08-30 at 18:51 +0800, James Henstridge wrote: > On 30/08/06, Thomas Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Scenario 2) I go to use another machine that's mounting > > > the same NFS home directory, or is otherwise getting the > > > same GConf values. This machine is running Gnome 2.14, > > > which doesn't include Clarius. > > > > The same thing would happen if you went to a machine running a Gnome > > version prior to that which Clearlooks was available in. Or if you > > selected a theme that you have installed locally, or any other > > combination of possibilities. I think it is slightly unreasonable to > > assume we can never add new themes. > > Just because we've done things that make using multiple Gnome versions > difficult in the past doesn't mean we should repeat them now. I fully recognized that sometimes we just have to bite the bullet and deal with the compatibility issues. To a certain extent, most changes introduce some level of compatibility problem, even if it's only an issue of user learning. The point is to minimize the more aggravating churn. The default theme just needed to be changed, and it took three whole release cycles for my whining to make the change happen. That created a compatibility rift between 2.10 and 2.12. It had to be done, so we swallow it. If we do it again for 2.16, it creates another rift, leaving us with three classes: [2.10 --] [2.12 2.14] [2.16 ++]. Coupled with incompatible changes in other desktop-wide modules, we get a combinatorial explosion of problem-causing versions for large networks. It's not a never-or-always question. It's a minimization thing. > > > Interim 2) I utter some choice words and post a flame to > > > Slashdot and/or OSNews. I go to the theme manager and > > > change my theme back to Clearlooks. > > > > > > Scenario 3) I go back to do some work on the machine that's > > > running Gnome 2.16. See scenario 1. > > > > It's running Clearlooks, but with a slightly "updated" appearance. > > > > > > > > Friends don't let friends churn keys. > > > > I know several people have already pointed out the relevant points about > > the change, but I just want to reassure you I did consider these > > scenarios before I made the changes. > > > > There were several reasons for the change. Firstly, I wanted to make > > sure we didn't go through "appearance churn". The new cairo based > > clearlooks engine provides several changes to the UI. I wanted to make > > the 2.16 appearance more consistent with the 2.14 appearance. I also had > > several people mention to me that they did not want Gnome to go down the > > "glossy appearance" route. It was therefore critical that the glossy > > scrollbars were toned down before the release. Unfortunately I was under > > the impression that I made this change before the UI freeze, which I now > > realise was incorrect. Secondly, the change did not affect any > > translatable strings, so I assumed it did not affect the string freeze. > > > > The reason I felt it necessary to make our own gtk+ theme (in > > gnome-themes, rather than relying on the one provided by gtk-engines), > > is that we probably will want to make more conservative changes in the > > future than the author of Clearlooks wants to make. Sorry, I didn't realize earlier that gtk-engines installs gtkrc files as well as the engines. That does mitigate the migration problems. I think a big part of putting the theme into the Gnome release is making the theme suitable for Gnome. If Richard wants a theme he can do anything with, then he should have a separate theme. Heck, I'm fine with it being in gnome-themes. I'm sure we offered to put Clearlooks into Gnome under a different name, leaving the Clearlooks hackers free to do whatever they want with the theme named Clearlooks. We did this, for instance, when we incorporated Glider (née SmoothGNOME) into gnome-themes. > > Having spoken to Richard about this problem (unfortunately he has been > > very busy and we didn't get a chance to discuss it before), he seems > > willing to keep the Clearlooks gtkrc as conservative as Gnome wants it, > > and put more exciting changes into a separate gtkrc. With the permission > > of the release team, I would be happy to revert the changes, and change > > the one line that makes the scrollbars blue in the Clearlooks gtkrc. > > If the theme author is okay with it, this sounds like it would make > everyone happy. I'm down with this. -- Shaun ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Clarius
Le mercredi 30 août 2006, à 10:03, Thomas Wood a écrit : > Having spoken to Richard about this problem (unfortunately he has been > very busy and we didn't get a chance to discuss it before), he seems > willing to keep the Clearlooks gtkrc as conservative as Gnome wants it, > and put more exciting changes into a separate gtkrc. With the permission > of the release team, I would be happy to revert the changes, and change > the one line that makes the scrollbars blue in the Clearlooks gtkrc. Looks good to me. If this happens, please make sure to announce this at least on marketing-list since this can affect the release notes. Thanks, Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Clarius
On 30/08/06, Thomas Wood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Scenario 2) I go to use another machine that's mounting > > the same NFS home directory, or is otherwise getting the > > same GConf values. This machine is running Gnome 2.14, > > which doesn't include Clarius. > > The same thing would happen if you went to a machine running a Gnome > version prior to that which Clearlooks was available in. Or if you > selected a theme that you have installed locally, or any other > combination of possibilities. I think it is slightly unreasonable to > assume we can never add new themes. Just because we've done things that make using multiple Gnome versions difficult in the past doesn't mean we should repeat them now. > > Interim 2) I utter some choice words and post a flame to > > Slashdot and/or OSNews. I go to the theme manager and > > change my theme back to Clearlooks. > > > > Scenario 3) I go back to do some work on the machine that's > > running Gnome 2.16. See scenario 1. > > It's running Clearlooks, but with a slightly "updated" appearance. > > > > > Friends don't let friends churn keys. > > I know several people have already pointed out the relevant points about > the change, but I just want to reassure you I did consider these > scenarios before I made the changes. > > There were several reasons for the change. Firstly, I wanted to make > sure we didn't go through "appearance churn". The new cairo based > clearlooks engine provides several changes to the UI. I wanted to make > the 2.16 appearance more consistent with the 2.14 appearance. I also had > several people mention to me that they did not want Gnome to go down the > "glossy appearance" route. It was therefore critical that the glossy > scrollbars were toned down before the release. Unfortunately I was under > the impression that I made this change before the UI freeze, which I now > realise was incorrect. Secondly, the change did not affect any > translatable strings, so I assumed it did not affect the string freeze. > > The reason I felt it necessary to make our own gtk+ theme (in > gnome-themes, rather than relying on the one provided by gtk-engines), > is that we probably will want to make more conservative changes in the > future than the author of Clearlooks wants to make. > > Having spoken to Richard about this problem (unfortunately he has been > very busy and we didn't get a chance to discuss it before), he seems > willing to keep the Clearlooks gtkrc as conservative as Gnome wants it, > and put more exciting changes into a separate gtkrc. With the permission > of the release team, I would be happy to revert the changes, and change > the one line that makes the scrollbars blue in the Clearlooks gtkrc. If the theme author is okay with it, this sounds like it would make everyone happy. James. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Clarius
Shaun McCance wrote: > On Tue, 2006-08-29 at 10:01 +1200, Glynn Foster wrote: >> Hey, >> >> Shaun McCance wrote: >>> I'm going to coin a new term: key churn. This is when people >>> make frivolous and unnecessary changes to GConf keys or their >>> default values. It sucks for large deployments. Gnome is >>> bigger than your personal desktop. >> I don't really care too much about the name change, but what I do care about >> is >> the migration story between themes as new engines/icons/whatever are dropped >> in >> and out. This stuff isn't as smooth as it should be - hopefully Calum can >> provide details of what currently happens [we documented this for an ARC case >> recently]. > > I don't care about the name change out of some phonetophilic > adoration of the word "Clearlooks". I care because of the > problems it introduces. > > Scenario 1) I have, at some point, explicitly set my theme > to Clearlooks, rather than getting Clearlooks from the GConf > default value. I upgrade to Gnome 2.16. What happens? You get the Clearlooks theme, that is installed by gtk-engines. > > Interim 1) I utter some choice words about the ugly boxiness > of the default GTK+ rendering. But I'm pretty clever, so I > go to the theme manager, find Clarius, and switch. Clarius > is now explicitly set as my theme in GConf. You don't get the ugly default GTK+ rendering, because you already have Clearlooks installed. > > Scenario 2) I go to use another machine that's mounting > the same NFS home directory, or is otherwise getting the > same GConf values. This machine is running Gnome 2.14, > which doesn't include Clarius. The same thing would happen if you went to a machine running a Gnome version prior to that which Clearlooks was available in. Or if you selected a theme that you have installed locally, or any other combination of possibilities. I think it is slightly unreasonable to assume we can never add new themes. > Interim 2) I utter some choice words and post a flame to > Slashdot and/or OSNews. I go to the theme manager and > change my theme back to Clearlooks. > > Scenario 3) I go back to do some work on the machine that's > running Gnome 2.16. See scenario 1. It's running Clearlooks, but with a slightly "updated" appearance. > > Friends don't let friends churn keys. I know several people have already pointed out the relevant points about the change, but I just want to reassure you I did consider these scenarios before I made the changes. There were several reasons for the change. Firstly, I wanted to make sure we didn't go through "appearance churn". The new cairo based clearlooks engine provides several changes to the UI. I wanted to make the 2.16 appearance more consistent with the 2.14 appearance. I also had several people mention to me that they did not want Gnome to go down the "glossy appearance" route. It was therefore critical that the glossy scrollbars were toned down before the release. Unfortunately I was under the impression that I made this change before the UI freeze, which I now realise was incorrect. Secondly, the change did not affect any translatable strings, so I assumed it did not affect the string freeze. The reason I felt it necessary to make our own gtk+ theme (in gnome-themes, rather than relying on the one provided by gtk-engines), is that we probably will want to make more conservative changes in the future than the author of Clearlooks wants to make. Having spoken to Richard about this problem (unfortunately he has been very busy and we didn't get a chance to discuss it before), he seems willing to keep the Clearlooks gtkrc as conservative as Gnome wants it, and put more exciting changes into a separate gtkrc. With the permission of the release team, I would be happy to revert the changes, and change the one line that makes the scrollbars blue in the Clearlooks gtkrc. -Thomas ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Clarius
Em Ter, 2006-08-29 às 14:40 -0500, Shaun McCance escreveu: > On Tue, 2006-08-29 at 18:42 +0100, Calum Benson wrote: > > On Tue, 2006-08-29 at 10:01 +1200, Glynn Foster wrote: > > > Hey, > > > > > > Shaun McCance wrote: > > > > I'm going to coin a new term: key churn. This is when people > > > > make frivolous and unnecessary changes to GConf keys or their > > > > default values. It sucks for large deployments. Gnome is > > > > bigger than your personal desktop. > > > > > > I don't really care too much about the name change, but what I do > > care about is > > > the migration story between themes as new engines/icons/whatever are > > dropped in > > > and out. This stuff isn't as smooth as it should be - hopefully > > Calum can > > > provide details of what currently happens [we documented this for an > > ARC case > > > recently]. > > > > It seems to go something like this (at least on the 2.15 machine I was > > using to experiment with it): > > [snip] > > > 2. If a theme's index.theme file remains after an upgrade, but one or > > more of its three components are no longer installed, on opening the > > theme capplet your theme is shown as selected, as if nothing was > > wrong. > > When you drill down into the details dialog, though, the behaviour is > > the same as case 1... the 'phantom' theme components are shown as > > selected, until you select an alternative instead, at which point they > > disappear. > > This is the relevant point. The Clearlooks gtkrc file will no longer > be available (assuming you've done a clean install, or updated using > a package manager that removes old files). > > I'm less concerned about the theme manager's behavior than I am about > how your desktop will appear. If there's no gtkrc file, GTK+ has no > choice but to fall back to its boxy default. > Clearlooks is still available, it's installed by the gtk-engines package. Cheers, Evandro ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Clarius
On Tue, 2006-08-29 at 18:42 +0100, Calum Benson wrote: > On Tue, 2006-08-29 at 10:01 +1200, Glynn Foster wrote: > > Hey, > > > > Shaun McCance wrote: > > > I'm going to coin a new term: key churn. This is when people > > > make frivolous and unnecessary changes to GConf keys or their > > > default values. It sucks for large deployments. Gnome is > > > bigger than your personal desktop. > > > > I don't really care too much about the name change, but what I do > care about is > > the migration story between themes as new engines/icons/whatever are > dropped in > > and out. This stuff isn't as smooth as it should be - hopefully > Calum can > > provide details of what currently happens [we documented this for an > ARC case > > recently]. > > It seems to go something like this (at least on the 2.15 machine I was > using to experiment with it): [snip] > 2. If a theme's index.theme file remains after an upgrade, but one or > more of its three components are no longer installed, on opening the > theme capplet your theme is shown as selected, as if nothing was > wrong. > When you drill down into the details dialog, though, the behaviour is > the same as case 1... the 'phantom' theme components are shown as > selected, until you select an alternative instead, at which point they > disappear. This is the relevant point. The Clearlooks gtkrc file will no longer be available (assuming you've done a clean install, or updated using a package manager that removes old files). I'm less concerned about the theme manager's behavior than I am about how your desktop will appear. If there's no gtkrc file, GTK+ has no choice but to fall back to its boxy default. -- Shaun ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Clarius
On Tue, 2006-08-29 at 10:01 +1200, Glynn Foster wrote: > Hey, > > Shaun McCance wrote: > > I'm going to coin a new term: key churn. This is when people > > make frivolous and unnecessary changes to GConf keys or their > > default values. It sucks for large deployments. Gnome is > > bigger than your personal desktop. > > I don't really care too much about the name change, but what I do care about > is > the migration story between themes as new engines/icons/whatever are dropped > in > and out. This stuff isn't as smooth as it should be - hopefully Calum can > provide details of what currently happens [we documented this for an ARC case > recently]. It seems to go something like this (at least on the 2.15 machine I was using to experiment with it): 1. If you're using an installed theme, and its index.theme file disappears as a result of an upgrade, your current theme will become a "Custom Theme" in the theme capplet. If you then drill down into the theme details dialog, it will initially show as still being comprised of the gtk, icon and metacity components that originally made up that theme, even if they're no longer installed either. But... if you then select a different gtk, icon or metatcity theme, the list is refreshed, and any non-existent components then disappear, which could be a bit of an unpleasant surprise for the unsuspecting user. Assuming you don't try and edit the theme in that way, you'll just get console errors whenever an application tries to render something that would have used any of the now-non-existent theme components, and the default theme will be used instead. Which seems to mean 'gnome' for icons or controls, and 'Simple' for metacity-- *not* the defaults defined by the gconf schemas. 2. If a theme's index.theme file remains after an upgrade, but one or more of its three components are no longer installed, on opening the theme capplet your theme is shown as selected, as if nothing was wrong. When you drill down into the details dialog, though, the behaviour is the same as case 1... the 'phantom' theme components are shown as selected, until you select an alternative instead, at which point they disappear. 3. If a theme engine disappears, you're given no warnings at all in the theme preferences UI, just a console error every time something tries to use the non-existent engine. I guess the 'phantom component' behaviour is actually intentional-- you wouldn't want to permanently switch the user's settings to some different component when the previous one couldn't be found, because they might just be temporarily logged into a machine that doesn't have that component installed. However, the theme capplet UI could probably do a much better job of indicating that the selected component wasn't currently available, and that a fallback was being used instead. Cheeri, Calum. -- CALUM BENSON, Usability Engineer Sun Microsystems Ireland mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Java Desktop System Group http://ie.sun.com +353 1 819 9771 Any opinions are personal and not necessarily those of Sun Microsystems ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Clarius
On Tue, 2006-08-29 at 10:01 +1200, Glynn Foster wrote: > Hey, > > Shaun McCance wrote: > > I'm going to coin a new term: key churn. This is when people > > make frivolous and unnecessary changes to GConf keys or their > > default values. It sucks for large deployments. Gnome is > > bigger than your personal desktop. > > I don't really care too much about the name change, but what I do care about > is > the migration story between themes as new engines/icons/whatever are dropped > in > and out. This stuff isn't as smooth as it should be - hopefully Calum can > provide details of what currently happens [we documented this for an ARC case > recently]. I don't care about the name change out of some phonetophilic adoration of the word "Clearlooks". I care because of the problems it introduces. Scenario 1) I have, at some point, explicitly set my theme to Clearlooks, rather than getting Clearlooks from the GConf default value. I upgrade to Gnome 2.16. What happens? Interim 1) I utter some choice words about the ugly boxiness of the default GTK+ rendering. But I'm pretty clever, so I go to the theme manager, find Clarius, and switch. Clarius is now explicitly set as my theme in GConf. Scenario 2) I go to use another machine that's mounting the same NFS home directory, or is otherwise getting the same GConf values. This machine is running Gnome 2.14, which doesn't include Clarius. Interim 2) I utter some choice words and post a flame to Slashdot and/or OSNews. I go to the theme manager and change my theme back to Clearlooks. Scenario 3) I go back to do some work on the machine that's running Gnome 2.16. See scenario 1. Friends don't let friends churn keys. -- Shaun ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Clarius
Hey, Shaun McCance wrote: > I'm going to coin a new term: key churn. This is when people > make frivolous and unnecessary changes to GConf keys or their > default values. It sucks for large deployments. Gnome is > bigger than your personal desktop. I don't really care too much about the name change, but what I do care about is the migration story between themes as new engines/icons/whatever are dropped in and out. This stuff isn't as smooth as it should be - hopefully Calum can provide details of what currently happens [we documented this for an ARC case recently]. Glynn ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Clarius
On 8/28/06, Shaun McCance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The default theme for 2.16 has been changed from Clearlooks > to Clarius. This is apparently just Clearlooks without the > glossy scrollbars. > > Rant the first: This change was made on August 8th: > http://cvs.gnome.org/viewcvs/libgnome/schemas/desktop_gnome_interface.schemas.in?rev=1.26&view=log > > That's after every freeze we have except the hard code freeze. Actually, checking the timestamp after following the link, it was made at Mon Aug 7 23:40:35 2006 UTC, which was before the string freeze assuming the libgnome release was made within about 20 minutes. (In this case, there were additional other libgnome issues, though, so Thomas asked the release-team for a short extension on irc) It was, however, after string change announcement period had started. > And yet, I saw no discussion or announcement on d-d-l or the > documentation list. Yes, even the name of the default theme > is a big deal. What is so hard about keeping us informed? I had been under the impression that it was the same theme with a different name (and even glossed over that detail with the other issues that were brought up at the time). I probably should have checked closer. And I didn't think about how it would affect the schema, so when Thomas mentioned it on irc and in email (http://mail.gnome.org/archives/release-team/2006-August/msg00060.html), I forgot to mention that it needed to be announced. So, I'm at least partially at fault. Sorry about that. > Rant the second: What's the point of the name change, really? > The Clearlooks theme isn't even in CVS anymore: > > http://cvs.gnome.org/viewcvs/gnome-themes/gtk-themes/Clearlooks/ > > So we're only installing Clarius with gnome-themes. How does > dropping the glossy blue scrollbars constitutes a name change? > Those glossy blue scrollbars weren't even in the old Clearlooks > that I originally pushed through as the new default theme some > release cycles back. > > I'm going to coin a new term: key churn. This is when people > make frivolous and unnecessary changes to GConf keys or their > default values. It sucks for large deployments. Gnome is > bigger than your personal desktop. "key churn" -- I like that. So, what suggested changes do people have to prevent problems for large deployments? Can you comment here as well, Thomas? ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Clarius
The default theme for 2.16 has been changed from Clearlooks to Clarius. This is apparently just Clearlooks without the glossy scrollbars. Rant the first: This change was made on August 8th: http://cvs.gnome.org/viewcvs/libgnome/schemas/desktop_gnome_interface.schemas.in?rev=1.26&view=log That's after every freeze we have except the hard code freeze. And yet, I saw no discussion or announcement on d-d-l or the documentation list. Yes, even the name of the default theme is a big deal. What is so hard about keeping us informed? Rant the second: What's the point of the name change, really? The Clearlooks theme isn't even in CVS anymore: http://cvs.gnome.org/viewcvs/gnome-themes/gtk-themes/Clearlooks/ So we're only installing Clarius with gnome-themes. How does dropping the glossy blue scrollbars constitutes a name change? Those glossy blue scrollbars weren't even in the old Clearlooks that I originally pushed through as the new default theme some release cycles back. I'm going to coin a new term: key churn. This is when people make frivolous and unnecessary changes to GConf keys or their default values. It sucks for large deployments. Gnome is bigger than your personal desktop. Rant off. -- Shaun ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
