Re: REMINDER: GEP-2 discussion end date

[Seth Nickell <snickell stanford edu>]

On Sat, 2002-09-28 at 12:48, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> On Sat, 2002-09-28 at 20:37, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> > 
> > Seth Nickell <snickell stanford edu> writes:
> > > http://www.gnome.org/~seth/theme-set-editor.png
> > > http://www.gnome.org/~seth/theme-set-selector.png
> > 
> > The nice thing about this setup, to me, is that it can just replace
> > the current Theme dialog (and the current dialog is well on its way to
> > having too many tabs and generally sucking as we add new component
> > themes). We could move toward making "theme" mean "metatheme."  That
> > beautifully answers the question of how much extra clutter this adds
> > to the menu - none.
> > 
> > Bastien - do you need to say "don't apply a certain part of the theme"
> > when you could just duplicate the theme, change the relevant part to
> > what you want? e.g. if you want all of a theme but keep your current
> > icon theme, you Duplicate the theme, edit it, change icon theme to
> > your current one, then apply the theme. Seems workable.
> 
> My main problem would be with the editing part. Ie. I have these 2
> themes I want to mix. I apply the first one without the background, the
> second one with the font, and I can then save a third theme without a
> problem.
> 
> It goes especially true if we get more "parts" supported like you say
> below. This was the way the good ol' Window 9x themes panel worked, and
> I think it was very usable, and fits exactly in what we're trying to
> achieve.

I suppose this is where we start disagreeing. I thought/think the Win9x
themes section was massively overcomplex, and had strange interactions
with other preferences. I do not consider it a compelling or desirable
interface.

-Seth