Re: [Sugar-devel] [Browse-webkit] Changing its bundle_id

2010-07-23 Thread Lucian Branescu
I've rebranded Browse-webkit to Surf-115. http://people.sugarlabs.org/lucian/Surf-115.xo On 22 July 2010 19:03, Lucian Branescu wrote: > I was planning to simply pretend that Browse-webkit is a newer version > of Surf. In a way it is, since they share some ancient git history :) > > So unless Bob

Re: [Sugar-devel] [Browse-webkit] Changing its bundle_id

2010-07-22 Thread Lucian Branescu
I was planning to simply pretend that Browse-webkit is a newer version of Surf. In a way it is, since they share some ancient git history :) So unless Bobby minds us using Surf's brand, we shouldn't need a new icon. Thanks for offering, though. On 22 July 2010 18:54, Gary Martin wrote: > On 22 J

Re: [Sugar-devel] [Browse-webkit] Changing its bundle_id

2010-07-22 Thread Gary Martin
On 22 Jul 2010, at 17:26, Lucian Branescu wrote: > If bobbyp agrees, I'll rebrand it to Surf until it gets merged to > master. Would that be ok? Need a new svg icon, temp or otherwise? Happy to cook something up, similar to the old surf svg involving a breaking wave (I'd go for open circle insi

Re: [Sugar-devel] [Browse-webkit] Changing its bundle_id

2010-07-22 Thread Benjamin M. Schwartz
On 07/22/2010 12:26 PM, Lucian Branescu wrote: > If bobbyp agrees, I'll rebrand it to Surf until it gets merged to > master. Would that be ok? I think that's a good solution. --Ben signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Sugar-devel

Re: [Sugar-devel] [Browse-webkit] Changing its bundle_id

2010-07-22 Thread Lucian Branescu
If bobbyp agrees, I'll rebrand it to Surf until it gets merged to master. Would that be ok? On 22 July 2010 17:24, Benjamin M. Schwartz wrote: > On 07/22/2010 12:18 PM, Lucian Branescu wrote: >> In order to better test Browse-webkit, we'd need to package and distribute >> it. > > If it isn't hea

Re: [Sugar-devel] [Browse-webkit] Changing its bundle_id

2010-07-22 Thread Benjamin M. Schwartz
On 07/22/2010 12:18 PM, Lucian Branescu wrote: > In order to better test Browse-webkit, we'd need to package and distribute it. If it isn't heavily tested and known to work perfectly, definitely don't call it "Browse", and definitely don't use the same icon. Browse is by far the #1 most important

[Sugar-devel] [Browse-webkit] Changing its bundle_id

2010-07-22 Thread Lucian Branescu
In order to better test Browse-webkit, we'd need to package and distribute it. However, it is plagued with dependency issues. It requires pywebkitgtk 1.1.6 and webkitgtk 1.1.7, which aren't an option on fedora 11 without breaking other things. pywebkitgtk has a bug (http://code.google.com/p/pywebk