[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Nodoka issues



On Sat, 2007-09-22 at 10:39 +0200, Martin Sourada wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-09-22 at 09:28 +0200, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote:
> > 1) Highlighted menu options appear light gray on medium gray.
> > 2) It is difficult to see which window will get focus when they are
> > tiled or nested and Alt-Tab is used to switch.
> > 3) Unfocused tabs seem just a bit too dark. Or maybe too saturated.
> It is a packages incompatibility problem... The package from F8 does not
> work in F7. If you rebuild it (rpmbuild --rebuild
> gtk-nodoka-engine-0.6-2.fc8.src.rpm) or build from sources then the
> above mentioned issues should be fixed.

Excellent.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=301851

> > 4) (purely opinion) The caption buttons might look nicer moved 4 to 6
> > pixels to the right.
> > 
> I am not sure I understand what you mean? The button on the left or the
> buttons on the right? Or something completely different?

The iconize/maximize/close buttons. Compare:
http://ivazquez.fedorapeople.org/images/nodoka-tabs.png
http://ivazquez.fedorapeople.org/images/nodoka-tabs2.png

> > 5) The packages are misnamed. They should be gtk2-engine-nodoka,
> > gnome-theme-nodoka, and metacity-theme-nodoka.
> > 
> gtk-engine-nodoka as in gtk-engine-murrine. No point in changing already
> used naming schemes. 

It's disheartening to see "they already screwed up" as justification for
this. But at least it's the truth.

> nodoka-theme-gnome is used because the main name is nodoka theme
> (similar scheme to beryl-gnome, which is metapackage pulling all gnome
> related beryl bits in), so I put it in the front, noone mentioned it as
> an issue in the review request, also there are currently no naming
> guidelines for that AFAIK.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#head-e865dfbf5ffb4156a1bdf299ace96f48af903a7a

"If a new package is considered an "addon" package that enhances or adds
a new functionality to an existing Fedora package without being useful
on its own, its name should reflect this fact.

The new package ("child") should prepend the "parent" package in its
name, in the format: %{parent}-%{child}."

I see the parent as being gnome, and the child as being nodoka.

> nodoka-metacity-theme as in {echo,tango}-icon-theme.

Well, that's stretching just a bit. There's a difference between a set
of icons packaged to create a theme, and a theme for just a single app.

> I looked at various theme packages that were in the repos and decided on
> these names after. If there are any guidelines concerning this, please
> forward me to them, if not it would be good to create ones, what do you
> think?

I definitely think this would be a good idea. Plenty of package reviews
have come and gone with comments about naming, but still we have
contention, as observed here.

-- 
Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams <ivazqueznet gmail com>

PLEASE don't CC me; I'm already subscribed

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]