<quote who="Federico Mena Quintero"> > On Mon, 2006-02-06 at 13:36 -0600, Federico Mena Quintero wrote: > > > 6. Create a subpackage of symlinks from the missing icons (the old icon > > names) to the new icons. If you don't have a new icon that matches, > > find the closest generic one, or simply put in the old icon image with a > > marker to indicate that it needs to be replaced. See this nice > > technique: http://blogs.msdn.com/jensenh/archive/2006/01/10/511202.aspx > > To clarify this: the point above is to make it easy to find cases where > we *do* have an old-style icon name and image, *and* a way to map it to > a new-style name, but we *don't* have a Tango-ified image to go with the > name.
Dude, why are we supporting this *wholly inappropriate* late breakage? This is not the kind of change that we should meekly accept at this stage of the release process. We don't *have* to do this, and we *shouldn't* do it. This is a choice between release discipline and riding a train wreck. My tough stance on this has *nothing* to do with dobey or quasi-usability issues raised on Planet GNOME - I fully support doing it at the start of the next release cycle. But seriously, the *NEXT* release cycle. Don't get caught on the train wreck, - Jeff -- FISL 7.0: Porto Alegre, Brazil http://fisl.softwarelivre.org/7.0/www/ "We are peaking sexually when they are peaking. And two peaks makes a hell of a good mount." - SMH _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
