kwwii at ubuntu.com
Thu Oct 9 22:33:18 BST 2008
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
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.
More information about the ubuntu-desktop