On Thursday 09 October 2008 22:54:39 Martin Pitt wrote: > Mark Shuttleworth [2008-10-09 21:38 +0100]: > > What's the size-on-CD saving of removing the themes we don't want? > > The entire package is 270 kB. I guess we want to keep some of them > (Clearlooks, Inverted for a11y), so we would talk about some 150 kB.
The theme engines have larger file sizes than the xml files to define a given theme, true. This should not be the argument for removing them. (Gosh, I wish it was that easy :p) > > > Doing that split would introduce quite expensive packaging changes, a > > > permanent delta from Debian, > > > > Errr.... don't we package Gnome ahead of Debian? > > We do, Debian is currently at the hardy version. That's actually the > least of my concerns, too (building a new binary package is still > relatively cheap), I'm more worried about the bad press we'd get from > upstream and whoever else. I think that if we replaced the aging themes we could, in their place, include a couple of interesting new ones. I think users would get much more out of being able to select a modern sexy theme. In this way we offer our default theme, accessability themes and a few beautiful, sexy themes. I realize that the upstream issue is important but I wonder what gnome is thinking when they offer "glider" or "crux" as a modern theme for their users. I get the feeling that the gnome-themes package was not inteded to be installed by any dist by default...if one needs an accessibility theme you install this...and/or if you are a hard-core old-timer you'll want crux as well. I am for adding a theme engine (if needed) and a couple of new themes. It would be very easy to find a few alternatives to the older ones we offer now (even if we cannot install another engine). It would defintely more than make up for the effort in user's eyes. -- Kenneth -- ubuntu-desktop mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop
