Problem is, people do use them. Some do prefer an ungy fast, useable, nothing in the way gui. That is why I offered to do thinice, mist, or something for them. Are we just going to remove them and give them pixmap and slow cairo? I don't think so!!! I won't take responsibility in that slaughter! I have spoken for them. Will anyone listen and at least give them the smooth engine. We do not need inexperienced, imature voting for eyecandy not considering the real world. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but it's the reason gnome has lagged in eyecandy for so long. There needs to be a middle ground. Something for both ends on the spectrum, and ubuntulooks is not light and fast, so that can not count for light and fast just because it is an engine. Pixbuff is an engine...is it light? No. Think of everyone before you vote!!!
I think that the whole point of this exercise is to get some really good looking themes in Ubuntu, and while I don't think that procludes any Smooth theme, I think it means not packing a huge number of them in I agree that we _must_ keep a few speedy engines in, which is one of the reasons I champion Industrial for inclusion. I had a look at http://gtkperf.sourceforge.net/index.php?page=testing&id=1 which suggests we should really be using cleanice if we want a truly performance focussed skin! Back at that stage human didn't use Cairo, as far asI remember, which probably explains its speed... -- ubuntu-art mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
