> > Well, sorry Jeff, but this email pretty much says that that's the intention
> > and the action towards its realization:
> > http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2005-February/msg00458.html
>
> I agree with Jeff here. When I read that story on osnews, my reaction
> was "What the fu
> I agree with Jeff here. When I read that story on osnews, my reaction was
> "What the fuck? Since when does _redhat_ decide which theme is going to be
> the default theme for gnome? They can decide the default gnome theme for
> redhat all they want, but they can't do that for gnome proper" I'm
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005, Eugenia Loli-Queru wrote:
>
> >> > Yup. We'll try to add it to CVS as soon as we fork from 2.10.
> >>
> >> Great news! ClearLooks is indeed a great theme.
> >
> > I would greatly appreciate some restraint of your Slashdot trigger finger
> > in
> > the future. "ClearLooks to be
On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 14:15:45 +1100, Jeff Waugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > At that point, Seth's email was *crystal clear* that this WILL be the
> > default theme of Gnome 2.12.
>
> Seth confirmed that we were TALKING about the default theme for 2.12, not
> that we had DECIDED on the defau
> At that point, Seth's email was *crystal clear* that this WILL be the
> default theme of Gnome 2.12.
Seth confirmed that we were TALKING about the default theme for 2.12, not
that we had DECIDED on the default theme for 2.12. The only crystal clear
point made in Seth and Diana's mail is that C
Rodney Dawes wrote:
Currently, intltool is distributing the generated .gmo files, within
tarballs. Christian Persch recently filed a bug against intltool, as
this still causes some issues with builddir != srcdir. I'd prefer to
not duplicate generated files if possible. If anyone has sufficient
reas
> Yup. We'll try to add it to CVS as soon as we fork from 2.10.
Great news! ClearLooks is indeed a great theme.
I would greatly appreciate some restraint of your Slashdot trigger finger
in
the future. "ClearLooks to be Default Theme on Gnome 2.12" is not even
close
to an accurate description of S
> > Yup. We'll try to add it to CVS as soon as we fork from 2.10.
>
> Great news! ClearLooks is indeed a great theme.
I would greatly appreciate some restraint of your Slashdot trigger finger in
the future. "ClearLooks to be Default Theme on Gnome 2.12" is not even close
to an accurate descript
Though Clearlooks is a very pleasant theme overall, I find that
_inset_ menu bar definitely weird, and contrasts with just about any
other theme out there. It gives me a strange and uncomfortable feeling
looking at that menu bar :|
it is a gtkrc option, so we could turn it off for the default t
> I recall a positive comment about Clearlooks from someone in the Ubuntu
> world too (jdub?).
I've been looking at Clearlooks since 0.2.2, but very seriously since 0.3.
There are only a few changes here and there that I'd like to suggest, but
I'll chat to Richard and Daniel about those. It migh
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 22:47:07 +, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 17:14 -0500, Diana Fong wrote:
> >We collected a few more theme possibilities and had some brief
> >discussions on http://live.gnome.org/NewDefaultTheme .
> >
> >After looking them over,
Rodney Dawes wrote:
Steven Garrity wrote:
Hey Novell people: what about you guys? Any interest in Clearlooks?
I've none really. It looks like Bluecurve. Whoo. There's nothing
particularly special about it. Same stuff, different colors. It's
not as ugly as "Simple" was, but few things are really.
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 18:27 -0400, Steven Garrity wrote:
> Hey Novell people: what about you guys? Any interest in Clearlooks?
I've none really. It looks like Bluecurve. Whoo. There's nothing
particularly special about it. Same stuff, different colors. It's
not as ugly as "Simple" was, but few th
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 23:23 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
> Matthias has a nice explanation of what is possibly happening:
> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=146075#c89
>
> I'm not sure it explains why the patch [1] works around the problem,
> though.
>
> [1] http://bugzilla.gnome.org/at
Elijah Newren wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 18:21:40 -0500, Christopher Aillon
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Someone point me in the right direction, then. I'll get this supported
in Firefox and Mozilla upstream.
Sweet! I've been trying to get myself oriented in Mozilla code today.
Hopefully this mea
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 16:55:23 -0700, Elijah Newren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 18:21:40 -0500, Christopher Aillon
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Someone point me in the right direction, then. I'll get this supported
> > in Firefox and Mozilla upstream.
Oh, and here's the
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 18:21:40 -0500, Christopher Aillon
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Elijah Newren wrote:
> > On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:43:35 -0500, Luis Villa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>The bug we have a handle on- go elijah go!
> >>166722: gnome_url_show needs to use startup-notification
Elijah Newren wrote:
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:43:35 -0500, Luis Villa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The bug we have a handle on- go elijah go!
166722: gnome_url_show needs to use startup-notification and take a
timestamp parameter- basically, this is the 'when i open a webpage
from xchat, the browser n
Yup. We'll try to add it to CVS as soon as we fork from 2.10.
Great news! ClearLooks is indeed a great theme. I helped out a bit the two
main developers of the theme with usability (Richard, Daniel thank you for
putting up with me :), but I always had on my todo list to send an email to
this li
> Just so we're very, very, VERY clear on this, we are talking about
> the default theme for 2.12 right?
Yup. We'll try to add it to CVS as soon as we fork from 2.10.
-Seth
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gn
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 17:14 -0500, Diana Fong wrote:
>We collected a few more theme possibilities and had some brief
>discussions on http://live.gnome.org/NewDefaultTheme .
>
>After looking them over, we felt Clearlooks
>( http://live.gnome.org/ClearLooks ) was the strongest. After looking at
>a l
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 17:14 -0500, Diana Fong wrote:
>We collected a few more theme possibilities and had some brief
>discussions on http://live.gnome.org/NewDefaultTheme .
>
>After looking them over, we felt Clearlooks
>( http://live.gnome.org/ClearLooks ) was the strongest. After looking at
>a l
Diana Fong wrote:
After looking them over, we felt Clearlooks
( http://live.gnome.org/ClearLooks ) was the strongest. After looking at
a lot of themes, they all started to look similar (gradient here,
rounded there, etc). Clearlooks is not particularly exceptional in this
regard, but it does look g
Le lundi 28 fÃvrier 2005 Ã 13:20 -0500, Havoc Pennington a Ãcrit :
>On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 19:13 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
>> Currently, the stack trace with --sync is, IIRC, this:
>> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=128317#c19
>
>Looking at the code, I'm a bit skeptical that's with --sy
We collected a few more theme possibilities and had some brief
discussions on http://live.gnome.org/NewDefaultTheme .
After looking them over, we felt Clearlooks
( http://live.gnome.org/ClearLooks ) was the strongest. After looking at
a lot of themes, they all started to look similar (gradient he
man, 28,.02.2005 kl. 15.41 -0500, skrev Nalin Dahyabhai:
>On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 10:37:56AM -0700, Elijah Newren wrote:
>> On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 18:21:42 +0100, Sven Herzberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > I already asked Nalin about this, unfortunately I didn't get a reply from
>> > him.
>>
>> A
Hi all,
gtkhtml module has been branched for Evolution 2.2/GNOME 2.10.
The branch name is gnome-2-10, the branch point was tagged as gnome-2-10-branchpoint.
Cheers
Radek
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mai
On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 10:37:56AM -0700, Elijah Newren wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 18:21:42 +0100, Sven Herzberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I already asked Nalin about this, unfortunately I didn't get a reply from
> > him.
>
> Anyone have a problem with Sven taking over? Speak up now or fo
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:59:31 -0500, Luis Villa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > (3) Crispin and Christian have already added code to Galeon and
> > Epiphany to try to make them handle not being launched with startup
> > notification (from a quick glance at the code, I think they could do a
> > littl
Hi Luis,
> And of course the number of patches in the fedora vte package (Kjartan
> told me the count was 23) tells me that at least some of the OS
> vendors /are/ distracted by it.
Actually there are ~7, I think. 2 of them were written by Nalin and are
in upstream CVS and 3 or 4 of them were don
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:59:31 -0500, Luis Villa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:35:28 -0700, Elijah Newren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I should point out a few things here:
> > (1) I think this bug can be punted, given a small change to nautilus
> > and gnome-terminal to make
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 19:13 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
> Currently, the stack trace with --sync is, IIRC, this:
> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=128317#c19
Looking at the code, I'm a bit skeptical that's with --sync. If it were,
then the X error should have happened when the X request
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 19:13 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
> Le lundi 28 fÃvrier 2005 Ã 12:37 -0500, Havoc Pennington a Ãcrit :
> >On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 17:02 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
> >> On Mon, February 28, 2005 16:43, Luis Villa said:
> >> > 146075 Crash while adding images to desktop- there ar
Le lundi 28 fÃvrier 2005 Ã 12:37 -0500, Havoc Pennington a Ãcrit :
>On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 17:02 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
>> On Mon, February 28, 2005 16:43, Luis Villa said:
>> > 146075 Crash while adding images to desktop- there are a ton of
>> > dups here, and it can still be duplicated in
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:31:24 -0500, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> Of course, if we do get J Random Enthusiastic and they do screw up we
> can always ship an old release tag of VTE, so I guess there's no genuine
> danger other than hurt feelings.
Somebody could do a friendly fork and create a "new" emu
Currently, intltool is distributing the generated .gmo files, within
tarballs. Christian Persch recently filed a bug against intltool, as
this still causes some issues with builddir != srcdir. I'd prefer to
not duplicate generated files if possible. If anyone has sufficient
reason as to why they sh
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:35:28 -0700, Elijah Newren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:43:35 -0500, Luis Villa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The bug we have a handle on- go elijah go!
> > 166722: gnome_url_show needs to use startup-notification and take a
> > timestamp parameter-
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 12:31:24 -0500, Havoc Pennington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 23:17 +0700, Ross Golder wrote:
> > On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 10:43 -0500, Luis Villa wrote:
> > >122150 gnome-termnal 2.4.0.1 won't "redraw" text lines properly-
> > >redrawing is broken and h
And note that good old xterm has active maintenance and development
(Thomas Dickey). For all its warts and non-hig-complying problems,
there is an alternative that is very solid in the way of general
terminal emulation. It is far from clear to me that vte needs more than
typical maintenance, lack
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 18:21:42 +0100, Sven Herzberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I already asked Nalin about this, unfortunately I didn't get a reply from him.
Anyone have a problem with Sven taking over? Speak up now or forever
hold your peace. (I know Kjartan tried long and hard to contact Nalin
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 17:02 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
> On Mon, February 28, 2005 16:43, Luis Villa said:
> > 146075 Crash while adding images to desktop- there are a ton of
> > dups here, and it can still be duplicated in 2.9.90, apparently.
>
> This bug is mainly caused by bug #128317. Som
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 10:43:35 -0500, Luis Villa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The bug we have a handle on- go elijah go!
> 166722: gnome_url_show needs to use startup-notification and take a
> timestamp parameter- basically, this is the 'when i open a webpage
> from xchat, the browser never pops to
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 23:17 +0700, Ross Golder wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 10:43 -0500, Luis Villa wrote:
> >122150 gnome-termnal 2.4.0.1 won't "redraw" text lines properly-
> >redrawing is broken and has been for a long time. Given that vte is
> >defacto unmaintained, and there is a patch
I already asked Nalin about this, unfortunately I didn't get a reply from him.
Regards,
Sven
-Original Message-
From: Luis Villa
To: Ross Golder
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 11:46:40 -0500
Subject: vte [was Re: houston, we have a problem- 2.10 showstoppers]
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 23:17:08 +07
On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 23:17:08 +0700, Ross Golder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 10:43 -0500, Luis Villa wrote:
> >122150 gnome-termnal 2.4.0.1 won't "redraw" text lines properly-
> >redrawing is broken and has been for a long time. Given that vte is
> >defacto unmaintaine
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 10:43 -0500, Luis Villa wrote:
>122150 gnome-termnal 2.4.0.1 won't "redraw" text lines properly-
>redrawing is broken and has been for a long time. Given that vte is
>defacto unmaintained, and there is a patch that has been tested for a
>while now in gentoo, this just
On Mon, February 28, 2005 16:43, Luis Villa said:
> 146075Crash while adding images to desktop- there are a ton of
> dups here, and it can still be duplicated in 2.9.90, apparently.
This bug is mainly caused by bug #128317. Someone made a really simple
patch [1] for this bug that seems to
man, 28,.02.2005 kl. 10.43 -0500, skrev Luis Villa:
>OK, all... we've been nagging about the showstoppers for a while now
>and had medium-to-poor success on them. By my count:
>
>http://tinyurl.com/657ob
>
>We're now down to 7, one or two of which are puntable, but many of
>which are extremely emba
OK, all... we've been nagging about the showstoppers for a while now
and had medium-to-poor success on them. By my count:
http://tinyurl.com/657ob
We're now down to 7, one or two of which are puntable, but many of
which are extremely embarassing and some of which even have patches.
Yes, some of t
now that 2.10 is approaching i would like to remind this issue
On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 07:56:47 +0100, Mark McLoughlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> Here's my take:
>
> - Ideally every module should make a release when tarballs are called
> for unless there hasn't been a single co
man, 28 02 2005 kl. 14:13 +0200, skrev Nikos Charonitakis:
> now that 2.10 is approaching i would like to remind this issue
Sounds like a very very very good idea!
>
> On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 07:56:47 +0100, Mark McLoughlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > Here's my take:
> >
> > -
51 matches
Mail list logo
