On Sun, 2007-03-04 at 10:21 +, Duncan wrote:
Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted
below, on Sat, 03 Mar 2007 21:35:16 +0700:
On 2/27/07, Andrej Kacian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because it's much more convenient to just go emerge theme instead of
Dňa Fri, 2 Mar 2007 21:02:54 -0700
Daniel Robbins [EMAIL PROTECTED] napísal:
#3 It's ok to add themes to Portage if they are part of an official
theme collection for a particular package. That way we have all the
official themes - everything else would be up to the user to install.
What if
On 2/27/07, Andrej Kacian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 12:24:15 -0500
Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For anything else, let the user download what they want and use it as
they see fit. There's not much reason to track them in the package
manager. That being said,
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:08:34 +0100
Andrej Kacian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Because it's much more convenient to just go emerge theme instead of
googling up the upstream website, finding the link to download,
download it, unpack and figure out how to install.
I don't know about that. One reason
Hey Chris,
I pretty much agree with you in regards to themes. Without strict
rules, we can suddenly have floods of ~300 theme ebuilds and they'll
all get added to the tree. I'd suggest another exception:
#3 It's ok to add themes to Portage if they are part of an official
theme collection for a
On 2/28/07, Christian Birchinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Those are theme-engines and not just a few pixmaps and with an rc
file. The main part of those engines are compiled libraries.
Don't treat them like a few files the user just has to copy in
his homedir.
Noted. Thanks for the reminder
On Mon, Feb 26, 2007 at 12:24:15PM -0500, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 10:43 -0500, Daniel Gryniewicz wrote:
On Sun, 2007-02-25 at 21:31 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:
Andrej Kacian wrote:
It makes sense slowly removing *applications* depending on gtk1. Themes
should
On Sun, 2007-02-25 at 21:31 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:
Andrej Kacian wrote:
It makes sense slowly removing *applications* depending on gtk1. Themes
should
go last, along with gtk1 itself.
Gtk1 is already ugly enough, do you want it to be even more ugly?
Point, set, and match.
Much
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 10:43 -0500, Daniel Gryniewicz wrote:
On Sun, 2007-02-25 at 21:31 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:
Andrej Kacian wrote:
It makes sense slowly removing *applications* depending on gtk1. Themes
should
go last, along with gtk1 itself.
Gtk1 is already ugly enough, do
Samuli Suominen wrote:
What do YOU think about removing these from tree?
*I* think it's a great idea, but *I* may be heavily medicated at the moment.
Seriously, IMHO the less we have depending on GTK+-1 the better. Others
will disagree loudly.
Related picture,
Andrej Kacian [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on Sun, 25 Feb 2007 17:07:55 +0100:
On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 09:37:33 -0600
Ryan Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Seriously, IMHO the less we have depending on GTK+-1 the better.
Others will disagree loudly.
It makes
On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 23:10:16 + (UTC)
Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Keep in mind that those who have it already
merged along with their favorite theme can keep them in overlay, so
removing the themes from the tree simply keeps new users from merging
something that's already on its way
12 matches
Mail list logo
