Il giorno gio, 06/03/2008 alle 15.19 +0100, Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen ha
scritto:
> On 05/03/2008, Andrea Cimitan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>         
>         Il giorno mer, 05/03/2008 alle 13.52 +0100, Sebastian
>         Billaudelle ha
>         scritto:
>         
>         > Hi folks!
>         >
>         > Because my modem-driver is broken (never play around with
>         > startup-scripts;-)) I wasn't able to read the mails.
>         > I'll do it later, because I'm sitting in an internet cafe
>         and I'm a
>         > little bit short in time.
>         >
>         > I'm sorry for my bad and short post. I'll post more later!
>         >
>         > I've looked into the xl_cheese-/clearlooks-engine and
>         changed some
>         > points.
>         > I could go on like this fixing the points written before.
>         >
>         > At first, there was the problem that windows without a
>         toolbar looked
>         > ugly, because the color of the menubar was not the same as
>         the windows
>         > bg-color.
>         > That's changed now: The menubar is colored like the
>         background of the
>         > window and the gradient of the toolbar is changed a little
>         bit to fit
>         > to that change...
>         >
>         > The first point is the "unity of the menubaritem and the
>         menu itself".
>         > I looked into the code of the eXperience-engine and hacked a
>         little
>         > bit in clearlooks.
>         > That should work now to, even if the menu is placed higher
>         than the
>         > menubar (Then the menubaritem-widget is turned "upside
>         down").
>         > Compiz/Emerald is still a problem...
>         
>         I'm the Clearlooks developer (yes Murrine too :P ), my friend
>         Benzea is
>         the Maintainer of Clearlooks, and he is the author of the
>         eXperience
>         engine :D
>         So we will implement (he is the right guy to do this) this
>         feature the
>         day we get a sane way to do it, without the hackish way in
>         eXperience.
>         Another *huge* problem is that menuitems don't get shadows, so
>         the whole
>         menu will always look ugly, except an highly decentered shadow
>         like in
>         your sceenshot.
>         (I'm using centered shadows, with 0 x-y offset, like a lot of
>         huys... so
>         this feature without shadow on menuitems will cause just
>         glitches)
>         
>         >
>         > Here's a little screenshot:
>         >
>         http://img248.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bildschirmfoto1su9.png
>         > Later I'll upload the engine, but I've to clean up the code
>         before
>         > (This was my first contact to C;-)).
>         
>         NO, please NO yet another engine. I was totally against the
>         decision of
>         xlcheese to publish his patch as another engine and I will
>         against a
>         similar idea.
>         Many years ago was created a tool, called DIFF, do publish
>         your patches
>         in a clean and simple way.
>         Just attach your patch for Clearlooks, Murrine or whatever.
>         In a future, if the patch is sane and we agree (in the meaning
>         it's not
>         hackish and it will work with compiz/shadows), that thing
>         could be part
>         of Gnome.
>         It's so useless to publish a fork with more than 95% of the
>         same code.
>         Yes, NODOKA (aka murrine with a different name and fixed
>         hilight_ratio
>         and other options) is an useless engine. And I will be
>         laughing when
>         I'll publish the next release which is faster, better looking,
>         alpha-capable, with a *100 times better* structured code :)
>         Just to
>         notice its capabilities, Murrine's SVN in just 10 lines of
>         code can
>         emulate Nodoka engine, with the benefits of a faster but also
>         more
>         secure/stable code :) (just add style = NODOKA in your gtkrc)
>         eheh
> 
> While I agree 10000% percent that forking theme engines is a very bad
> idea, given that Murrine was only recently put under public version
> control you have more or less spurred this trend your self... That
> should all change now that Murrine is in Gnome svn. So no excuses for
> forking :-)
> 
Murrine was public since September, but I moved a lot of Subversions
servers including intilinux.org, launchpad and now (finally) gnome.
Murrine-RGBA was in launchpad two days after my post in December and in
the last month I moved to gnome's svn since I hate launchpad :).
> 
> Cheers,
> Mikkel
> 
> 
-- 
Andrea "Cimi" Cimitan - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Website: http://www.cimitan.com
Murrine Author: http://www.cimitan.com/murrine
GNOME Developer: http://www.gnome.org


-- 
ubuntu-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

Reply via email to