Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: What do you think about removing gtk-1.2 theme engines from tree?

[Christian Birchinger]

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
> > > > 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 as I hate gtk1, I agree with this.  Leave the themes as long as
> > they're working and there's apps.
>
> I'm just curious, but why?  It's not like people can't get GTK+ themes
> themselves quite easily.  Personally, I don't think we should have
> themes (for anything) in the tree except for two cases:
>
> #1. The theme is considered part of an upstream package set, fex. if
> GNOME or KDE ship with a small set of themes, they should be included
> #2. The themes are made by Gentoo
>
> 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, I'm not opposed to the themes staying in the
> tree, either.  I'm just trying to find out people's motivations for
> either keeping them/removing them.

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.

Christian

PS: please stop those weekly attempts to remove Gtk1 from the
tree. Not everyone is using Gnome or KDE and lots of smaller
dockapps and similar tools are Gtk1 and work perfectly fine.
(Yes, this was a rant and it's my personal opinion)
-- 
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list