Re: GEP-2 (metathemer)

[Bill Haneman <bill haneman sun com>]

Jeff said:
> 
> <quote who="Michael Meeks">
> 
> > 	I don't quite see why it's asking for bad usability to allow themes to
> > change arbitrary settings; why is that ? perhaps have some method for
> > only allowing settings that are publicly / tweakable by control-center
> > to be changed - good taste would rather dictate that anyway.
> 
> As would security.
> 
>   <somedude> Oh no! My desktop has gone pearshaped after installing the
>     HaHaHaAtSexyFun theme!
>   <h4x0r> I 4m t4 31337 th3m3x0r hax0r!! b0w to my 4uth0r1ty!!!
>   <boc> Burrito: pokey
> 
> I live in fear. ;-)

Yes, 

This has come up already, and one proposal was to limit the "extended"
gconf keys that could be tweaked to those in a particular directory, for
instance /desktop/theme  or something, rather than giving a
theme-changer free reign to muck with /apps, etc.  This would require
some Metatheme-awareness on the part of GNOME applications, or at least
dictate that look-and-feel keys that were intended to be "themeable"
respect such a convention.

Of course the keys already "well known" to the Desktop Theme Set thingy
could include those outside of such a directory, but we still would need
extensibility to at least a limited part of the gconf 'tree'.  

> - Jeff
> 
> -- 
>          "The GPL is good. Use it. Don't be silly." - Michael Meeks         
> 
> --__--__--
> 
> Message: 8
> To: desktop-devel-list gnome org
> Subject: pkg-config 0.13
> From: Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>
> Date: 19 Sep 2002 22:04:18 -0400
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> pkg-config 0.13 is up with a fix for the -pthread issue.  GNOME 2.1.x
> now builds for me up to ORBit2, where there's a Makefile bug with
> gthread libs not included in the ldflags for the test programs.
> 
> Havoc
> 
> --__--__--
> 
> Message: 9
> Subject: omf files that dont validate
> From: mike <mike redtux demon co uk>
> To: "desktop-devel-list gnome org" <desktop-devel-list gnome org>
> Date: 20 Sep 2002 04:17:50 +0100
> 
> Does anyone know whether there are any alternate dtds that take account
> of omf files that do not validate such as glade or evolution
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --__--__--
> 
> Message: 10
> Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 04:25:27 +0100 (IST)
> From: Mark McLoughlin <mark skynet ie>
> To: Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>
> Cc: desktop-devel-list gnome org
> Subject: Re: pkg-config 0.13
> 
> Hi Havoc,
> 
> On 19 Sep 2002, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> 
> > pkg-config 0.13 is up with a fix for the -pthread issue.  GNOME 2.1.x
> > now builds for me up to ORBit2, where there's a Makefile bug with
> > gthread libs not included in the ldflags for the test programs.
> 
> 	Thanks :-) I've fixed the ORBit2 issue and updated
> vicious-build-scripts. Everything else seems to be building for me so
> far ..
> 
> Cheers,
> Mark.
> 
> 
> --__--__--
> 
> Message: 11
> Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 13:33:23 +1000
> From: Malcolm Tredinnick <malcolm commsecure com au>
> To: desktop-devel-list gnome org
> Subject: Re: omf files that dont validate
> 
> On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 04:17:50AM +0100, mike wrote:
> > Does anyone know whether there are any alternate dtds that take account
> > of omf files that do not validate such as glade or evolution
> 
> What do you mean by "take account of"?
> 
> There should only be one DTD for the OMF files we use. If an XML file
> does not validate against that it is not an OMF file, so I am a bit
> worried by the possibility of multiple DTDs.
> 
> Malcolm
> 
> --__--__--
> 
> Message: 12
> Subject: Re: omf files that dont validate
> From: mike <mike redtux demon co uk>
> To: "desktop-devel-list gnome org" <desktop-devel-list gnome org>
> Date: 20 Sep 2002 04:55:02 +0100
> 
> On Fri, 2002-09-20 at 04:33, Malcolm Tredinnick wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 04:17:50AM +0100, mike wrote:
> > > Does anyone know whether there are any alternate dtds that take account
> > > of omf files that do not validate such as glade or evolution
> > 
> > What do you mean by "take account of"?
> > 
> > There should only be one DTD for the OMF files we use. If an XML file
> > does not validate against that it is not an OMF file, so I am a bit
> > worried by the possibility of multiple DTDs.
> > 
> > Malcolm
> 
> I understand this but what do we do about apps (mainly 1.4 but some 2.x
> apps like gnomedb and glade) which do not validate. This is the error
> output from scrollkeeper-update -p
> 
> 
> scrollkeeper-update: warning:
> /usr/share/omf/gnome-user-docs/introduction-to-gnome-C.omf overrides
> /usr/share/omf/gnome2-user-docs/introduction-to-gnome-C.omf
> OMF file [/usr/share/omf/gnome-user-docs/gnome-users-guide-C.omf] does
> not validate against ScrollKeeper-OMF DTD:
> /usr/share/xml/scrollkeeper/dtds/scrollkeeper-omf.dtd
> Unable to register
> /usr/share/omf/gnome-user-docs/gnome-users-guide-C.omf
> OMF file [/usr/share/omf/gnome-user-docs/glossary-C.omf] does not
> validate against ScrollKeeper-OMF DTD:
> /usr/share/xml/scrollkeeper/dtds/scrollkeeper-omf.dtd
> Unable to register /usr/share/omf/gnome-user-docs/glossary-C.omf
> OMF file [/usr/share/omf/gnome-user-docs/introduction-to-gnome-es.omf]
> does not validate against ScrollKeeper-OMF DTD:
> /usr/share/xml/scrollkeeper/dtds/scrollkeeper-omf.dtd
> Unable to register
> /usr/share/omf/gnome-user-docs/introduction-to-gnome-es.omf
> OMF file [/usr/share/omf/gnome-user-docs/gnome-users-guide-es.omf] does
> not validate against ScrollKeeper-OMF DTD:
> /usr/share/xml/scrollkeeper/dtds/scrollkeeper-omf.dtd
> Unable to register
> /usr/share/omf/gnome-user-docs/gnome-users-guide-es.omf
> OMF file [/usr/share/omf/gnome-user-docs/introduction-to-gnome-C.omf]
> does not validate against ScrollKeeper-OMF DTD:
> /usr/share/xml/scrollkeeper/dtds/scrollkeeper-omf.dtd
> Unable to register
> /usr/share/omf/gnome-user-docs/introduction-to-gnome-C.omf
> OMF file [/usr/share/omf/gnome-user-docs/introduction-to-gnome-it.omf]
> does not validate against ScrollKeeper-OMF DTD:
> /usr/share/xml/scrollkeeper/dtds/scrollkeeper-omf.dtd
> Unable to register
> /usr/share/omf/gnome-user-docs/introduction-to-gnome-it.omf
> OMF file [/usr/share/omf/gnome-user-docs/unix-primer-C.omf] does not
> validate against ScrollKeeper-OMF DTD:
> /usr/share/xml/scrollkeeper/dtds/scrollkeeper-omf.dtd
> Unable to register /usr/share/omf/gnome-user-docs/unix-primer-C.omf
> OMF file [/usr/share/omf/gnome-user-docs/unix-primer-es.omf] does not
> validate against ScrollKeeper-OMF DTD:
> /usr/share/xml/scrollkeeper/dtds/scrollkeeper-omf.dtd
> Unable to register /usr/share/omf/gnome-user-docs/unix-primer-es.omf
> OMF file [/usr/share/omf/gdm/gdmconfig-C.omf] does not validate against
> ScrollKeeper-OMF DTD:
> /usr/share/xml/scrollkeeper/dtds/scrollkeeper-omf.dtd
> Unable to register /usr/share/omf/gdm/gdmconfig-C.omf
> /usr/share/omf/evolution/evolution-no.omf:5: error: Input is not proper
> UTF-8, indicate encoding !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OMF file does not exist, is not readable, or is not well-formed XML:
> /usr/share/omf/evolution/evolution-no.omf
> Unable to register /usr/share/omf/evolution/evolution-no.omf
> OMF file [/usr/share/omf/evolution/evolution-C.omf] does not validate
> against ScrollKeeper-OMF DTD:
> /usr/share/xml/scrollkeeper/dtds/scrollkeeper-omf.dtd
> Unable to register /usr/share/omf/evolution/evolution-C.omf
> OMF file [/usr/share/omf/glade-2/glade-turbo-start-C.omf] does not
> validate against ScrollKeeper-OMF DTD:
> /usr/share/xml/scrollkeeper/dtds/scrollkeeper-omf.dtd
> Unable to register /usr/share/omf/glade-2/glade-turbo-start-C.omf
> OMF file [/usr/share/omf/glade-2/glade-faq-C.omf] does not validate
> against ScrollKeeper-OMF DTD:
> /usr/share/xml/scrollkeeper/dtds/scrollkeeper-omf.dtd
> Unable to register /usr/share/omf/glade-2/glade-faq-C.omf
> OMF file [/usr/share/omf/glade-2/glade-user-guide-C.omf] does not
> validate against ScrollKeeper-OMF DTD:
> /usr/share/xml/scrollkeeper/dtds/scrollkeeper-omf.dtd
> Unable to register /usr/share/omf/glade-2/glade-user-guide-C.omf
> OMF file [/usr/share/omf/libgda/libgda-C.omf] does not validate against
> ScrollKeeper-OMF DTD:
> /usr/share/xml/scrollkeeper/dtds/scrollkeeper-omf.dtd
> Unable to register /usr/share/omf/libgda/libgda-C.omf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > _______________________________________________
> > desktop-devel-list mailing list
> > desktop-devel-list gnome org
> > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
> > 
> 
> 
> --__--__--
> 
> Message: 13
> Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2002 14:11:35 +1000
> From: Malcolm Tredinnick <malcolm commsecure com au>
> To: desktop-devel-list gnome org
> Subject: Re: omf files that dont validate
> 
> On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 04:55:02AM +0100, mike wrote:
> > On Fri, 2002-09-20 at 04:33, Malcolm Tredinnick wrote:
> > > On Fri, Sep 20, 2002 at 04:17:50AM +0100, mike wrote:
> > > > Does anyone know whether there are any alternate dtds that take account
> > > > of omf files that do not validate such as glade or evolution
> > > 
> > > What do you mean by "take account of"?
> > > 
> > > There should only be one DTD for the OMF files we use. If an XML file
> > > does not validate against that it is not an OMF file, so I am a bit
> > > worried by the possibility of multiple DTDs.
> > 
> > I understand this but what do we do about apps (mainly 1.4 but some 2.x
> > apps like gnomedb and glade) which do not validate. This is the error
> > output from scrollkeeper-update -p
> 
> We fix them; they are broken. I thought I had already filed bugs against
> gnomedb and glade, but looking for them now, I cannot find them -- so I
> must have been hallucinating.
> 
> The decision has been made that scrollkeeper will validate OMF files
> before including the document, so the files must validate.
> 
> Now, I can sympathise with an argument that says the current DTD is a
> little inflexible in that it requires the fields to be in a particular
> order. Since the data in an OMF file is really just a bag of items, we
> should probably allow the tags in any order and that's a backwards
> compatible change to the DTD that ships with scrollkeeper. File a bug
> against scrollkeeper (at sourceforge) to get remind me to look at that
> if you like.
> 
> I do not know if gnomedb and glade are just suffering from that problem
> (tag ordering), but it may be that simple -- in which case it's a bit
> time-consuming to debug, because you go cross-eyed, but it's not too
> hard.
> 
> Evolution has at least one encoding problem (the evolution-no.omf
> file is not valid UTF-8 according to the output you posted) and that is
> clearly a bug. I don't know what is wrong with the 'C' version of it's
> OMF file, but I have only looked at your output below -- I don't have
> Evolution installed anywhere.
> 
> Malcolm
> 
> 
> --__--__--
> 
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> desktop-devel-list gnome org
> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
> 
> 
> End of desktop-devel-list Digest