--- "R.I.P. Deaddog" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2003-01-14(Tue) 16:48:46 -0800, David Walser > wrote: > > > Now I see the point. Geramik is trying to do > what > > > Bluecurve did, right? > > > > Basically. More specifically, the color, font, > and > > related settings that you configure for Keramik in > KDE > > Control Center are what Geramik uses, rather than > > reading .gtkrc* files and being configured with > Gnome > > tools. It's a Gtk+ theme for KDE users who have > to > > use Gtk+ apps, and it keeps the look of the two > > consistent 100% of the time. I'm not entirely > sure if > > Bluecurve is set up that way to be configured in > one > > place, and always look the same no matter the > toolkit, > > but if it doesn't do that it probably will in the > > future. > > I think I get your entire point now. So Geramik is > for those > who solely uses KDE as desktop, but don't touch > GNOME > desktop at all. They usually use KDE apps, but > occasionally use GTK+ apps, and want to make those > GTK+ apps look consistant with the whole Keramik > theme. > Isn't it?
Right. > However, I see why Fred has removed your scripts, > since > the effect of your %post/%postun scripts has gone > too > far -- it affected *ALL* persons who use GTK+ > software. So what? #1 - it's the sysadmin's choice to install it. It only makes sense to install if it's default really BUT #2 - if you for whatever reason wanted to have it installed and not default, it went out of its way to honor that choice. No affect on other Gtk+ users at all. There was no reason to remove all that work. > Besides, it still remains correct if no > %post/%postun > scripts is used, since people who want it can still > use > it anytime, and nothing is lost. That just doesn't make sense. > > If they don't want it (I'd want to hear this from > > Laurent first, as it's really for KDE users. > Crozat > > is the Gnome guy and he really has no business > messing > > with it), then they should delete it from contrib, > and > > probably additionally configure KDE to not use > Keramik > > by default. > > As I have said, you've gone too far. At least you > have to > write the scripts in such a way that, only those who > use > desktop in THAT way is affected. Yes, you have to > make > sure that people installed KDE desktop only, and if > people > install GNOME desktop later, your changes have to be > undone immediately and nicely. The idea is sysadmins that install this are supporting KDE for their users. You wouldn't want such a thing installed if that weren't the case. > That means you need to make Geramik cope with > people's > change in behavoir. Still doesn't make sense. I'll agree with one point you've made...if there were a way to have it install itself by default, but only activate for users that are in KDE (kind of like .gtkrc-kde), that would be better. Is this possible? > > > If the above is not achieved, Geramik will just > be a > > > normal > > > theme, nothing more, nothing less (quoted). > > > > No, that's still wrong. I think you'll understand > > from my explanation what Geramik really is. If > you > > just want a Gtk+ theme that looks like Keramik, > > Geramik is not what you want. Such "normal > themes" do > > exist. > > Yes, I do understand your point now, but still think > what > you proposition (its "intended usage") is flawed: > can knife > manufacturers say that knives are only for slicing > food, > and they prohibit people to use it differently? Because of the way Geramik works, you *can't* use it differently, and noone's going to. Someone that wants a Keramik-like Gtk+ theme will find one (they exist) and use that, not Geramik. __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
