[ubuntu-art] Reversion to Dapper Artwork

Steven Johnson swj_ms at yahoo.com
Fri Oct 13 03:37:35 BST 2006

I agree the reversion was the best thing that could
happen.  I see lots of good samples submitted and I
never understood why such an ugly wallpaper, gdm, etc.
was even considered.  While I do not like brownish
themes, light brown is not that bad...so if you must
stay with brown, may I suggest keeping the dapper gdm,
and using simple ubuntu wallpaper, and making a simple
ubuntu splash to match it as the ubuntu default.


--- m c <markc.lists at googlemail.com> wrote:

> Hey all,
> I'd just like to say (not that I have any sway in
> these matters) I
> strongly disagree with the decision to revert to
> Dapper artwork for
> Edgy. [If I have gotten the wrong impression about
> this please ignore
> the silly rant below]
> While I realise it might not meet the sabdfl's
> expectations or other
> Canonical management folk, and ultimately it is his
> distribution, I
> think that it is a bad idea to abandon the new,
> community driven, Edgy
> artwork.
> It's Edgy - that was meant to mean that dev's could
> put new,
> disruptive ideas into the distribution without fear
> that they may be a
> little rough around the edges. I think the same
> should apply to
> artwork - it was meant to be an experiment in
> community created
> artwork, and although it may be a little rough
> around the edges in
> places, I think the beta art and the implementations
> on the wiki
> *rock*
> In fact the sabd himself said [on the artwork] "I'm
> sure there will be
> rough edges in Edgy - that's the point " [1]
> The artwork may not fit with the 'brand' of Ubuntu
> as Canonical wants
> it, but you can't escape from the fact that the
> community *is* an
> essential part of the Ubuntu brand, and if you are
> trying to hide
> that, trying to make Ubuntu seem more professional,
> by rejecting
> community work to retain an image with certain (i.e.
> paying)
> customers, then I can't help but feel that Canonical
> are abandoning
> what makes Ubuntu so special to me and the many
> others who have
> contributed far more than me in making Ubuntu as
> sucessful as it is.
> I don't mean for this to sound like a paranoid rant,
> so now for some
> less emotional arguments...
> Many of the development changes in Edgy are
> 'under-the-hood' and not
> overly visible to users, and sticking with Dapper
> artwork will
> probably result higher unmet expectations of users
> as it is hard to
> see overly changes from Dapper, save possibly the
> *shiny* new usplash.
> Considering the vision of Edgy given by sabdfl
> included:
> "So dream a little about Xen for virtualisation,
> Xgl/AIGLX and other
> wonderful wobbly window bits, the goodness of
> Network Manager, a first
> flirt with multiarch support for true mixed 32-bit
> and 64-bit computing
> on AMD64, the interesting possibilities of the SMART
> package manager... "
> ... and as of these only AIGLX has been included in
> main, I believe to
> the issues raised by [2] in communicating release
> goals, will only be
> heightened by a lack of visual difference between
> Dapper and Edgy.
> [1] http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/48
> [2] http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/50
> Thanks,
> Mark
> -- 
> ubuntu-art mailing list
> ubuntu-art at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 

More information about the ubuntu-art mailing list