* Re: [gentoo-dev] GTK2 QT Theme
2004-01-11 7:59 ` Spider
@ 2004-01-11 8:32 ` Todd Berman
2004-01-11 9:58 ` Georgi Georgiev
2004-01-11 10:54 ` Troy Dack
2004-01-11 11:34 ` Drake Wyrm
2 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Todd Berman @ 2004-01-11 8:32 UTC (permalink / raw
To: Spider; +Cc: gentoo-dev
On Sun, 2004-01-11 at 02:59, Spider wrote:
> begin quote
> On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 18:18:24 +1100
> Troy Dack <tad@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> >
>
>
> > Ebuild is at:
> > http://dev.gentoo.org/~tad/overlay/x11-themes/gtk-engines-qt/
> > (copy to your overlay directory, don't forget the patch in files/)
> >
> > Screenshot at:
> > http://dev.gentoo.org/~tad/gtk-qt.png (~560K, 1600x1200)
> >
> > Currently most gtk-engines-* ebuilds seem to belong to the Gnome herd,
> > so not wanting to step on anyones toes, would the Gnome herd object to
> > this build being placed in the tree?
>
> as it is its crashy, check the reported gaim crashes due to the theme
> for example (yes. that was the 0.2 version). as ~ is -not- a playground
> for broken packages or known buggy things I oppose the inclusion of this
> until it can be shown as to not crash applications.
>
>
>
> //Spider
While I completely agree with that normally, I do think that since there
is nothing else like this, and if TaD adds some sort of disclaimer at
the bottom suggesting that it is crashy and they should try changing
their theme and seeing if crashes persist it shouldn't be a problem.
If this was an important package it being a bit buggy would be a good
reason to not include it, but it is basically a novelty item, and if TaD
will maintain it, why not?
Gentoo is about choice, and if a user chooses to run buggy themes that
might cause an app or two to capsize, who are we to stop them?
--Todd
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] GTK2 QT Theme
2004-01-11 8:32 ` Todd Berman
@ 2004-01-11 9:58 ` Georgi Georgiev
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Georgi Georgiev @ 2004-01-11 9:58 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
maillog: 11/01/2004-03:32:25(-0500): Todd Berman types
> On Sun, 2004-01-11 at 02:59, Spider wrote:
> >
> > as it is its crashy, check the reported gaim crashes due to the theme
> > for example (yes. that was the 0.2 version). as ~ is -not- a playground
> > for broken packages or known buggy things I oppose the inclusion of this
> > until it can be shown as to not crash applications.
> >
> >
> >
> > //Spider
>
> While I completely agree with that normally, I do think that since there
> is nothing else like this, and if TaD adds some sort of disclaimer at
> the bottom suggesting that it is crashy and they should try changing
> their theme and seeing if crashes persist it shouldn't be a problem.
>
> If this was an important package it being a bit buggy would be a good
> reason to not include it, but it is basically a novelty item, and if TaD
> will maintain it, why not?
>
> Gentoo is about choice, and if a user chooses to run buggy themes that
> might cause an app or two to capsize, who are we to stop them?
Or just mask it in package.mask, and it is easy enough for a user to unmask it.
--
( Georgi Georgiev ( When neither their poverty nor their honor (
) chutz@gg3.net ) is touched, the majority of men live )
( +81(90)6266-1163 ( content. -- Niccolo Machiavelli (
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] GTK2 QT Theme
2004-01-11 7:59 ` Spider
2004-01-11 8:32 ` Todd Berman
@ 2004-01-11 10:54 ` Troy Dack
2004-01-11 11:34 ` Drake Wyrm
2 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Troy Dack @ 2004-01-11 10:54 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1503 bytes --]
On Sun, 2004-01-11 at 18:59, Spider wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 18:18:24 +1100
> Troy Dack <tad@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > Currently most gtk-engines-* ebuilds seem to belong to the Gnome herd,
> > so not wanting to step on anyones toes, would the Gnome herd object to
> > this build being placed in the tree?
>
> as it is its crashy, check the reported gaim crashes due to the theme
> for example (yes. that was the 0.2 version). as ~ is -not- a playground
> for broken packages or known buggy things I oppose the inclusion of this
> until it can be shown as to not crash applications.
Fair enough, I don't want to cause any extra work for the Gnome herd.
I'll leave it in dev.g.o/~tad/overlay for the time being. I have added
a warning on dev.g.o that is visible when people browse to the ebuild
directory.
When (if) this theme shows better stability then it may be a candidate
for inclusion, for the time being, those that so desire can grab the
ebuild and use it at their own risk. (I don't think adding it to
package.mask is really appropriate either).
[ FWIW I haven't had any GTK2 applications crash whilst using this
theme, applications include: Evolution, Gaim, Multisync & XChat-2 ]
--
Troy Dack Gentoo moves pretty fast; if you don't stop and
tad@gentoo.org look around once in awhile, you could miss out.
Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x4D90BE3C
Key fingerprint = 1F3D 6C15 16AA 09D5 0C96 92E5 FD89 16F9 4D90 BE3C
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] GTK2 QT Theme
2004-01-11 7:59 ` Spider
2004-01-11 8:32 ` Todd Berman
2004-01-11 10:54 ` Troy Dack
@ 2004-01-11 11:34 ` Drake Wyrm
2 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Drake Wyrm @ 2004-01-11 11:34 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1198 bytes --]
On Sun, Jan 11, 2004 at 08:59:37AM +0100, in <20040111085937.06f3d628.spider@gentoo.org>, Spider <spider@gentoo.org> wrote:
...conversation about a proposed ebuild...
> as it is its crashy, check the reported gaim crashes due to the theme
> for example (yes. that was the 0.2 version). as ~ is -not- a playground
> for broken packages or known buggy things I oppose the inclusion of this
> until it can be shown as to not crash applications.
This seems as good a place as any to mention one of my many
ideas. ...which are usually ignored, but I might have a good
one someday. How about a new KEYWORDS flag to mark known-crapulent
packages. Playing off the use of "~arch" (which I read as "maybe arch"),
use "!arch" (which could be read "not arch") to mark packages which are
somewhere between useless and alpha, but happen to be worth watching
and developing. It would also be a great way to move the hard-masking
features of packages.mask into the relevant ebuild. Looks like that
might simplify a chunk of portage.py, too.
--
Batou: Hey, Major... You ever hear of "human rights"?
Kusanagi: I understand the concept, but I've never seen it in action.
--Ghost in the Shell
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
