<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 4:37 PM, Jelle de Jong <<a href="mailto:jelledejong@powercraft.nl">jelledejong@powercraft.nl</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c">Jelle de Jong wrote:<br>
>> On Sun, Mar 30, 2008 at 4:53 PM, Jelle de Jong<br>
>> <<a href="mailto:jelledejong@powercraft.nl">jelledejong@powercraft.nl</a>> wrote:</div></div></blockquote><div> </div><div><snip><br><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div><div class="Wj3C7c">>>><br>
>>> I have been walking around with this questions for a long time now.<br>
>>><br>
>>> But why don't we use upstream artwork and use the slim login manager?<br>
>>><br>
>>> I believe this is not against the new xubuntu mission/vision is it?<br>
>>><br>
>>> fluxbuntu is using it, why don't we work together with there artwork?<br>
>>><br>
>>> Every xubuntu release there is a lot of time and discussion about the<br>
>>> artwork..<br>
>>><br>
>>> <a href="http://slim.berlios.de/" target="_blank">http://slim.berlios.de/</a><br>
>>> <a href="http://wiki.fluxbuntu.org/index.php?title=Explore" target="_blank">http://wiki.fluxbuntu.org/index.php?title=Explore</a><br>
>>> <a href="http://live.gnome.org/GnomeArt/Tutorials" target="_blank">http://live.gnome.org/GnomeArt/Tutorials</a><br>
>>> <a href="http://art.gnome.org/backgrounds/" target="_blank">http://art.gnome.org/backgrounds/</a><br>
>>><br>
>>> Kind regards,<br>
>>><br>
>>> Jelle<br>
>>><br>
> > If I am not mistaken, we want each xubuntu release to be a unique<br>
> > visual experience rather than just a generic piece of look and feel.<br>
> ><br>
> > jmak<br>
><br>
> We can use different upstream artwork every release. As long as the<br>
> packaging process is done good and makes backward compatibility possible.<br>
><br>
> We could spent more efforts on creating better artwork in the form of<br>
> consistent tango style icons for all applications, combined with valid<br>
> .desktop files and svg and png based artwork. Also some HIG improvements<br>
> in the naming of applications will be a good proses.<br>
><br>
> Or is this not a thing we want to focus on?<br>
><br>
> Kind regards,<br>
><br>
> Jelle<br>
><br>
> PS jmak please do not top post or do you have something against bottom<br>
> posting please share your arguments. I really appreciate bottom posting<br>
> it allows me to follow the communication of everybody in a organised matter.<br>
><br>
<br>
</div></div>I would really like to hear the developers opinion about this? Are my<br>
suggestions against the xubuntu mission/development strategie?<br></blockquote></div><br>Artwork really isn't up to "the developers", it is up to those who do the artwork. If they want to produce new artwork each release, I'm not going to refuse to package it considering it doesn't take that much time up. If you think Jmak could better spend his time, maybe thats a discussion you could have with him personally but I know I'd find it a bit insulting if someone came to me and told me that maybe I should invest my time in Ubuntu instead of Xubuntu, or task xyz instead of xyz. Open source is generally all about scratching our own itches. As long as the look and feel is acceptable (which I measure by getting a number of third opinions from the ubuntu-art team and gaging general feedback) then I'll continue to do the packaging required.<br>
<br>Thanks,<br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Cody A.W. Somerville<br>Software Engineer<br>Red Cow Marketing & Technologies, Inc.<br>Office: 506-458-1290<br>Toll Free: 1-877-733-2699<br>Cell: 506-449-5899<br>Email: <a href="mailto:cody@redcow.ca">cody@redcow.ca</a><br>
<a href="http://www.redcow.ca">http://www.redcow.ca</a>