Hey all,
we've been discussing the idea of changing the default GTK+/Metacity theme in F12. Nodoka has been the default for a while, and it seems to undergo a major rework now ( http://mso-chronicles.blogspot.com/ ).
We don't want to do a radical visual change, though. The idea is to go back to the upstream default, Clearlooks.
Let me know what you think. I'd like to make this change for the alpha.
Matthias
Matthias Clasen (mclasen@redhat.com) said:
Hey all,
we've been discussing the idea of changing the default GTK+/Metacity theme in F12. Nodoka has been the default for a while, and it seems to undergo a major rework now ( http://mso-chronicles.blogspot.com/ ).
We don't want to do a radical visual change, though. The idea is to go back to the upstream default, Clearlooks.
Well, that would still be a visual change. Given that he's restarting nodoka from scratch, that would leave the options as being either: - go to clearlooks - stay with the old nodoka version ?
Also, would we be changing the icon set?
Bill
On Fri, 2009-07-31 at 15:35 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Matthias Clasen (mclasen@redhat.com) said:
Hey all,
we've been discussing the idea of changing the default GTK+/Metacity theme in F12. Nodoka has been the default for a while, and it seems to undergo a major rework now ( http://mso-chronicles.blogspot.com/ ).
We don't want to do a radical visual change, though. The idea is to go back to the upstream default, Clearlooks.
Well, that would still be a visual change. Given that he's restarting nodoka from scratch, that would leave the options as being either:
- go to clearlooks
- stay with the old nodoka version
?
I see that I should have phrased this better...
What I meant to covey is: we _do_ want some visual change, e.g. get rid of some small annoyances in the current default theme, such as the dotted lines in treeviews.
But as far as change goes, it is probably fine to keep it subtle (like going to Clearlooks) and not radical, like Lennart proposes (pick a dark default theme).
Also, would we be changing the icon set?
I don't think think we have readily available options here. gnome-colors is popular and has a nice blue variant, but it is not packaged for Fedora atm. http://www.gnome-look.org/content/show.php/GNOME-colors?content=82562
On Fri, 2009-07-31 at 17:36 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Fri, 2009-07-31 at 15:35 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Matthias Clasen (mclasen@redhat.com) said:
Hey all,
we've been discussing the idea of changing the default GTK+/Metacity theme in F12. Nodoka has been the default for a while, and it seems to undergo a major rework now ( http://mso-chronicles.blogspot.com/ ).
We don't want to do a radical visual change, though. The idea is to go back to the upstream default, Clearlooks.
Well, that would still be a visual change. Given that he's restarting nodoka from scratch, that would leave the options as being either:
- go to clearlooks
- stay with the old nodoka version
?
I see that I should have phrased this better...
What I meant to covey is: we _do_ want some visual change, e.g. get rid of some small annoyances in the current default theme, such as the dotted lines in treeviews.
These can be turned off by changing listviewstyle engine option to 0 and I'll do it if there is such desire. What are the other small annoyances?
Martin
Am Freitag, den 31.07.2009, 17:36 -0400 schrieb Matthias Clasen:
On Fri, 2009-07-31 at 15:35 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Matthias Clasen (mclasen@redhat.com) said:
Hey all,
we've been discussing the idea of changing the default GTK+/Metacity theme in F12. Nodoka has been the default for a while, and it seems to undergo a major rework now ( http://mso-chronicles.blogspot.com/ ).
We don't want to do a radical visual change, though. The idea is to go back to the upstream default, Clearlooks.
From what I see the change in Nodoka is not that radical, even if Martin
started from scratch. A change to Clearlooks would be IMO more radical - and more boring.
Nodoka has become a characteristic of Fedora, it's developed by a Fedora member inside the Project. I think we should stick with Nodoka, at least for F12. There will be no major changes and we can decide again for F13 about whether we follow Martins approach or go somewhere else.
Well, that would still be a visual change. Given that he's restarting nodoka from scratch, that would leave the options as being either:
- go to clearlooks
- stay with the old nodoka version
?
I see that I should have phrased this better...
What I meant to covey is: we _do_ want some visual change,
Do we? I'm fine with Nodoka as is.
e.g. get rid of some small annoyances in the current default theme, such as the dotted lines in treeviews.
I like them. If they annoy you, file a bug or turn them off as Martin already wrote.
But as far as change goes, it is probably fine to keep it subtle (like going to Clearlooks) and not radical, like Lennart proposes (pick a dark default theme).
No dark them please. If Ubuntu or others want to follow every new hip trend from Redmond - ok. But not Fedora please.
Nodoka has become too important for Fedora and Martin has put much work in it, so we shouldn't just throw it all away.
Regards, Christoph
On Sat, Aug 01, 2009 at 01:55:53AM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Am Freitag, den 31.07.2009, 17:36 -0400 schrieb Matthias Clasen:
On Fri, 2009-07-31 at 15:35 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Matthias Clasen (mclasen@redhat.com) said:
Hey all,
we've been discussing the idea of changing the default GTK+/Metacity theme in F12. Nodoka has been the default for a while, and it seems to undergo a major rework now ( http://mso-chronicles.blogspot.com/ ).
We don't want to do a radical visual change, though. The idea is to go back to the upstream default, Clearlooks.
From what I see the change in Nodoka is not that radical, even if Martin
started from scratch. A change to Clearlooks would be IMO more radical - and more boring.
Nodoka has become a characteristic of Fedora, it's developed by a Fedora member inside the Project. I think we should stick with Nodoka, at least for F12. There will be no major changes and we can decide again for F13 about whether we follow Martins approach or go somewhere else.
[...snip...]
I agree, but I think Martin is amenable to fixing minor annoyances so let's see a list of what those are, and explore fixing them for F12.
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 11:55 PM, Christoph Wickertchristoph.wickert@googlemail.com wrote:
e.g. get rid of some small annoyances in the current default theme, such as the dotted lines in treeviews.
I like them. If they annoy you, file a bug or turn them off as Martin already wrote.
I don't have a particularly strong opinion on the theme, but did we talk to Martin to see what he thinks about concerns raised with the current theme and his planned visual changes and if he'd be willing to adjust?
On Sat, 2009-08-01 at 01:55 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote:
From what I see the change in Nodoka is not that radical, even if Martin
started from scratch. A change to Clearlooks would be IMO more radical - and more boring.
Nodoka has become a characteristic of Fedora, it's developed by a Fedora member inside the Project. I think we should stick with Nodoka, at least for F12. There will be no major changes and we can decide again for F13 about whether we follow Martins approach or go somewhere else.
Yeah, my vote would be to keep Nodoka also.
Later, /B
On Sat, 2009-08-01 at 01:55 +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote:
Nodoka has become too important for Fedora and Martin has put much work in it, so we shouldn't just throw it all away.
Not to belittle Martins work, but I don't think Nodoka has the significance that you are trying to imply here. It is just a decent gray theme, based on other gray themes. If we switched to another one, most people wouldn't notice. And if they did, they wouldn't think 'pity Fedora dropped Nodoka' since they would have no idea what Nodoka is.
Anyway, I will try to come up with some more changes that we can do within the current Nodoka theme.
Matthias
Hey,
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Bill Nottinghamnotting@redhat.com wrote:
Matthias Clasen (mclasen@redhat.com) said:
Hey all,
we've been discussing the idea of changing the default GTK+/Metacity theme in F12. Nodoka has been the default for a while, and it seems to undergo a major rework now ( http://mso-chronicles.blogspot.com/ ).
We don't want to do a radical visual change, though. The idea is to go back to the upstream default, Clearlooks.
Well, that would still be a visual change. Given that he's restarting nodoka from scratch, that would leave the options as being either:
- go to clearlooks
- stay with the old nodoka version
For now we want to stay with upstream Clearlooks.
There are a few reasons for this. Roughly:
* Goals I don't agree with the stated goal of the Nodoka theme to make something that looks uniquely Fedora which also includes an icon theme. A better goal is to look good and be well integrated with the platform we are building upstream in GNOME.
* Alignment We have a number of pretty major and interesting things going on in GNOME that will appear before, during, or shortly after the F12 cycle. Some of these are client side decorations, a new theme drawing library, new high resolution icons, and GNOME Shell. Any and all of which really change what we want from a theme. We want to be working very closely with the upstream design, art, and theme community in order to keep the design and development loop as efficient as possible. For now, it seems that the consensus opinion in the upstream community is that clearlooks is the best engine on which to base further work.
* Experience This one is going to be somewhat subjective and prone to a whole lot of bikeshedding. I don't think Nodoka is where we want to be. I'm not sure it is all that helpful to go down a list of things that don't look right. Especially since there are things that we'd also like to change in Clearlooks. But I think Clearlooks is currently closer to what we want and probably a better base on which to work.
Also, would we be changing the icon set?
The current default is Mist, right? Can someone describe for me the exact differences between Mist and GNOME? Seems to me that they are similar. Looks like the folder icons are blue in Mist and tan in GNOME. Given that the theme "selected" color changes the window decorations and controls (not to mention the wallpaper) I'm not sure I like choosing a non-neutral color for the folder icons. Other than that what is different?
With the recent changes in GNOME to limit the number of icons used in menus and buttons this is less important than it would be otherwise. However, there are a number of key areas where icons are still very important. We'll also want to keep an eye on both the high resolution icons stuff and the moblin icon theme.
Jon
William Jon McCann (william.jon.mccann@gmail.com) said:
- Goals I don't agree with the stated goal of the Nodoka theme to make
something that looks uniquely Fedora which also includes an icon theme. A better goal is to look good and be well integrated with the platform we are building upstream in GNOME.
Well, given the stock Ubuntu themes, and the stock SLED themes, won't you end up with something that's uniquely Fedora even if you follow upstream?
Also, would we be changing the icon set?
The current default is Mist, right? Can someone describe for me the exact differences between Mist and GNOME? Seems to me that they are similar.
$ find /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/ /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/ /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/actions /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/actions/document-open.svg /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/status /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/status/folder-drag-accept.svg /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/status/folder-open.svg /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/status/folder-visiting.svg /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/places /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/places/folder-new.svg /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/places/folder-remote.svg /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/places/user-home.svg /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/places/folder.svg /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/places/folder-saved-search.svg
The entirety of it is changing the folder icons.
Bill
Hey Bill,
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Bill Nottinghamnotting@redhat.com wrote:
William Jon McCann (william.jon.mccann@gmail.com) said:
* Goals I don't agree with the stated goal of the Nodoka theme to make something that looks uniquely Fedora which also includes an icon theme. A better goal is to look good and be well integrated with the platform we are building upstream in GNOME.
Well, given the stock Ubuntu themes, and the stock SLED themes, won't you end up with something that's uniquely Fedora even if you follow upstream?
That seems like it would be a side effect, yes.
Also, would we be changing the icon set?
The current default is Mist, right? Can someone describe for me the exact differences between Mist and GNOME? Seems to me that they are similar.
$ find /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/ /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/ /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/actions /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/actions/document-open.svg /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/status /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/status/folder-drag-accept.svg /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/status/folder-open.svg /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/status/folder-visiting.svg /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/places /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/places/folder-new.svg /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/places/folder-remote.svg /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/places/user-home.svg /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/places/folder.svg /usr/share/icons/Mist/scalable/places/folder-saved-search.svg
OK, that's what it looked like to me but just wanted to check. Thanks for checking. So I'd say we go with the GNOME icons in that case.
Jon
On 08/05/2009 05:42 PM, William Jon McCann wrote:
OK, that's what it looked like to me but just wanted to check. Thanks for checking. So I'd say we go with the GNOME icons in that case.
And I'd say we stay with Mist and preserve our traditional blue look and feel.
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 10:42 -0400, William Jon McCann wrote:
OK, that's what it looked like to me but just wanted to check. Thanks for checking. So I'd say we go with the GNOME icons in that case.
Have you actually tried using the GNOME icons instead of Mist? It looks completely out of place with brownish folder icons instead of the blue ones we have the Mist.
FYI, that was the main reason we chose Mist instead of GNOME when we switched from Bluecurve a couple of years back. And I don't think we want this to change unless good reasons are put on the table.
Thanks, David
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 4:22 PM, David Zeuthendavidz@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 10:42 -0400, William Jon McCann wrote:
OK, that's what it looked like to me but just wanted to check. Thanks for checking. So I'd say we go with the GNOME icons in that case.
Have you actually tried using the GNOME icons instead of Mist? It looks completely out of place with brownish folder icons instead of the blue ones we have the Mist.
Of course I have tried it. Why does it look out of place? Though, I'm not going to get into a bikeshedding argument about the folder colors though. It isn't that big of a deal since they are the only icons that Mist provides.
Jon
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 16:29 -0400, William Jon McCann wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 4:22 PM, David Zeuthendavidz@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 10:42 -0400, William Jon McCann wrote:
OK, that's what it looked like to me but just wanted to check. Thanks for checking. So I'd say we go with the GNOME icons in that case.
Have you actually tried using the GNOME icons instead of Mist? It looks completely out of place with brownish folder icons instead of the blue ones we have the Mist.
Of course I have tried it. Why does it look out of place? Though, I'm not going to get into a bikeshedding argument about the folder colors though. It isn't that big of a deal since they are the only icons that Mist provides.
Perhaps it's not worth changing then.
David
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 4:38 PM, David Zeuthendavidz@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 16:29 -0400, William Jon McCann wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 4:22 PM, David Zeuthendavidz@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 10:42 -0400, William Jon McCann wrote:
OK, that's what it looked like to me but just wanted to check. Thanks for checking. So I'd say we go with the GNOME icons in that case.
Have you actually tried using the GNOME icons instead of Mist? It looks completely out of place with brownish folder icons instead of the blue ones we have the Mist.
Of course I have tried it. Why does it look out of place? Though, I'm not going to get into a bikeshedding argument about the folder colors though. It isn't that big of a deal since they are the only icons that Mist provides.
Perhaps it's not worth changing then.
Yeah. I think you may be right.
Jon
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 05:55 -0400, William Jon McCann wrote:
Hey,
Hi,
For now we want to stay with upstream Clearlooks.
For a while now, I have been wondering what "we" stands for here... The discussion seems to mostly happen off-list.
There are a few reasons for this. Roughly:
- Goals I don't agree with the stated goal of the Nodoka theme to make
something that looks uniquely Fedora which also includes an icon theme. A better goal is to look good and be well integrated with the platform we are building upstream in GNOME.
The uniqueness is one of the goals, of course we want to both look good and be well integrated with the platform for Nodoka. I don't personally believe to this to be valid reason for choosing Clearlooks over Nodoka. Although one of our goals with nodoka is to bring it to wider audience and provide consistent look throughout whole Fedora -- i.e. even for QT. But we are far from there...
- Alignment We have a number of pretty major and interesting things going on in
GNOME that will appear before, during, or shortly after the F12 cycle. Some of these are client side decorations, a new theme drawing library, new high resolution icons, and GNOME Shell. Any and all of which really change what we want from a theme. We want to be working very closely with the upstream design, art, and theme community in order to keep the design and development loop as efficient as possible. For now, it seems that the consensus opinion in the upstream community is that clearlooks is the best engine on which to base further work.
This is a pretty sound argument. Surely the gtk-engines stack is more tightly bound with upstream development than nodoka.
- Experience This one is going to be somewhat subjective and prone to a whole
lot of bikeshedding. I don't think Nodoka is where we want to be. I'm not sure it is all that helpful to go down a list of things that don't look right. Especially since there are things that we'd also like to change in Clearlooks. But I think Clearlooks is currently closer to what we want and probably a better base on which to work.
Again, I wonder who is "we" and what exactly do they want.
The current default is Mist, right? Can someone describe for me the exact differences between Mist and GNOME? Seems to me that they are similar. Looks like the folder icons are blue in Mist and tan in GNOME. Given that the theme "selected" color changes the window decorations and controls (not to mention the wallpaper) I'm not sure I like choosing a non-neutral color for the folder icons. Other than that what is different?
With the recent changes in GNOME to limit the number of icons used in menus and buttons this is less important than it would be otherwise. However, there are a number of key areas where icons are still very important. We'll also want to keep an eye on both the high resolution icons stuff and the moblin icon theme.
Mist just changes folders to be blue, which feels more Fedora.
Martin
PS: I'd really like to know who has the formal authority in the desktop design area -- is it the design-team, is it the Desktop SIG for GNOME, KDE SIG for KDE, ... or combination of both? IIRC the switch to Mist (at that time from bluecurve via incomplete Echo) was made by the predecessor to design-team. On the other hand this very discussion seems to be mostly Desktop SIG centered. While I don't have any preference as where the authority should be, I'd like it to be crystal clear... I certainly don't want to have a ping-pong between e.g. design-team switching icon theme to gnome-colors [1][2] while desktop SIG switching it to gnome-icon-theme...
References: [1] http://code.google.com/p/gnome-colors/ [2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=515280
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 18:03 +0200, Martin Sourada wrote:
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 05:55 -0400, William Jon McCann wrote:
Hey,
Hi,
For now we want to stay with upstream Clearlooks.
For a while now, I have been wondering what "we" stands for here... The discussion seems to mostly happen off-list.
'We' refers to the design and production "team" for the desktop spin. At the moment, this is mostly me and Jon. Some of the discussion does happen off-list, which is somewhat unfortunate. This tends to occur for a few reasons: * We happen to sit in an office within 10 feet of each other * Design is ideally a high bandwidth activity * We often have impromptu discussions * So we can focus and make some decisions (almost always after talking with upstream, the Fedora community, other smart people from other distributions, etc)
I have tried to keep this list in the loop on potentially controversial changes, such as the GIMP change.
[...]
PS: I'd really like to know who has the formal authority in the desktop design area -- is it the design-team, is it the Desktop SIG for GNOME, KDE SIG for KDE, ... or combination of both? IIRC the switch to Mist (at that time from bluecurve via incomplete Echo) was made by the predecessor to design-team. On the other hand this very discussion seems to be mostly Desktop SIG centered. While I don't have any preference as where the authority should be, I'd like it to be crystal clear... I certainly don't want to have a ping-pong between e.g. design-team switching icon theme to gnome-colors [1][2] while desktop SIG switching it to gnome-icon-theme...
In Fedora, we are not very good at 'crystal clear' and 'formal authority', which sometimes has the unfortunate effect of letting inertia and diverging interests prevail... The closest you will probably get to a 'formal authority' is the first few lines of the kickstart file defining the desktop spin:
# Maintained by the Fedora Desktop SIG: # http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Desktop # mailto:fedora-desktop-list@redhat.com
Matthias
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 16:46 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
'We' refers to the design and production "team" for the desktop spin. At the moment, this is mostly me and Jon. Some of the discussion does happen off-list, which is somewhat unfortunate. This tends to occur for a few reasons:
- We happen to sit in an office within 10 feet of each other
- Design is ideally a high bandwidth activity
- We often have impromptu discussions
- So we can focus and make some decisions (almost always after
talking with upstream, the Fedora community, other smart people from other distributions, etc)
That makes sense.
I have tried to keep this list in the loop on potentially controversial changes, such as the GIMP change.
Thanks for that :-)
In Fedora, we are not very good at 'crystal clear' and 'formal authority', which sometimes has the unfortunate effect of letting inertia and diverging interests prevail... The closest you will probably get to a 'formal authority' is the first few lines of the kickstart file defining the desktop spin:
# Maintained by the Fedora Desktop SIG: # http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Desktop # mailto:fedora-desktop-list@redhat.com
That makes it clear enough for me :-)
So... Back to the theme for F12. If I understand right, you are completely satisfied neither with Clearlooks nor Nodoka, but deem Clearlooks to be better candidate for being the default in F12 (for various reasons stated elsewhere in the thread). Do you have any list (or something like that) with what you'd like to change in either of them? I can certainly work on implementing such changes for Nodoka (even if it won't be default in F12, I'd like to continue with development both with the current version as well as with the rewrite), and perhaps might be able to help with Clearlooks as well (no promises though ;-).
Matthias
Martin
Hi Martin,
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 6:27 PM, Martin Souradamartin.sourada@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 16:46 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
...
So... Back to the theme for F12. If I understand right, you are completely satisfied neither with Clearlooks nor Nodoka, but deem Clearlooks to be better candidate for being the default in F12 (for various reasons stated elsewhere in the thread). Do you have any list (or something like that) with what you'd like to change in either of them? I can certainly work on implementing such changes for Nodoka (even if it won't be default in F12, I'd like to continue with development both with the current version as well as with the rewrite), and perhaps might be able to help with Clearlooks as well (no promises though ;-).
It would be awesome if you could work with us and the upstream Clearlooks developers to try to get some of the things done we're thinking about. I'll try to catch up with both you and Cimi in the next two days and hopefully we can figure out the best way to collaborate on this.
Anyway, just wanted to respond quickly that I think this is a very promising development and that I appreciate the very mature and constructive way you've approached this delicate situation (and the whole email thread). I'm hopeful for how this can turn out.
Thanks, Jon
On 08/05/2009 04:03 PM, Martin Sourada wrote:
On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 05:55 -0400, William Jon McCann wrote:
Hey,
Hi,
For now we want to stay with upstream Clearlooks.
For a while now, I have been wondering what "we" stands for here... The discussion seems to mostly happen off-list
Martin perhaps it's time that an art spins emerges with application themes artwork and a *DE of choice which the art team has full control over targeted at designers and novice end user. They can stick with upstream gnome artwork themes background and what not and target their spin at ? ( I'm not sure they even know ). In the long run the only thing that will separate distro's from each other is the art work and our art team certainly beats any other art team ( including upstream one ) out there by a mile. I will do my best to aid in a such a spin and I'm sure there are more out there that are more and willing to help the art team out in a spin creation since it has done so much for us.
JBG
On Fri, 31.07.09 15:17, Matthias Clasen (mclasen@redhat.com) wrote:
Hey all,
we've been discussing the idea of changing the default GTK+/Metacity theme in F12. Nodoka has been the default for a while, and it seems to undergo a major rework now ( http://mso-chronicles.blogspot.com/ ).
We don't want to do a radical visual change, though. The idea is to go back to the upstream default, Clearlooks.
Let me know what you think. I'd like to make this change for the alpha.
I must say I always look enviously to the OpenSUSE's and Ubuntu's of this world with their slick dark or semi-dark ("Sonar"? "Dust"?) themes. Fedora needs one too. (Or at least the ones stolen from opensuse/ubuntu)
Lennart
Hi I wouldn't bother too much about default theme, I was pretty happy with echo, later I have changed to other...Default clearlooks is OK, but would be nice to add some more themes for user to choose from. I couln't find any good looking dark themes for fedora, unlike ubuntu this need to be improved on fedora. Dark themes are quite popular. I have installed opensolaris theme nimbus on my ubuntu 8.04, but themes are matter of personal preferences. Very important IMO is desktop background, something which can put user on his kneel. I know that default colour for fedora is blue ( much better than brown !), but shouldn't it be a little less blueish, something with more life...but its art problem, difficult to describe. Tom
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 22:01:53 +0200 From: mzerqung@0pointer.de To: fedora-desktop-list@redhat.com Subject: Re: The default theme for F12
On Fri, 31.07.09 15:17, Matthias Clasen (mclasen@redhat.com) wrote:
Hey all,
we've been discussing the idea of changing the default GTK+/Metacity theme in F12. Nodoka has been the default for a while, and it seems to undergo a major rework now ( http://mso-chronicles.blogspot.com/ ).
We don't want to do a radical visual change, though. The idea is to go back to the upstream default, Clearlooks.
Let me know what you think. I'd like to make this change for the alpha.
I must say I always look enviously to the OpenSUSE's and Ubuntu's of this world with their slick dark or semi-dark ("Sonar"? "Dust"?) themes. Fedora needs one too. (Or at least the ones stolen from opensuse/ubuntu)
Lennart
-- Lennart Poettering Red Hat, Inc. lennart [at] poettering [dot] net http://0pointer.net/lennart/ GnuPG 0x1A015CC4
-- Fedora-desktop-list mailing list Fedora-desktop-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-desktop-list
_________________________________________________________________ With Windows Live, you can organise, edit, and share your photos. http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/134665338/direct/01/
On 07/31/2009 11:01 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
I must say I always look enviously to the OpenSUSE's and Ubuntu's of this world with their slick dark or semi-dark ("Sonar"? "Dust"?) themes. Fedora needs one too. (Or at least the ones stolen from opensuse/ubuntu)
While I welcome the addition of a dark theme (a good number of users like such one) i strongly oppose making it the *default*, the large majority is used to read black on white.
On Fri, 2009-07-31 at 15:17 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
Hey all,
we've been discussing the idea of changing the default GTK+/Metacity theme in F12. Nodoka has been the default for a while, and it seems to undergo a major rework now ( http://mso-chronicles.blogspot.com/ ).
We don't want to do a radical visual change, though. The idea is to go back to the upstream default, Clearlooks.
Let me know what you think. I'd like to make this change for the alpha.
Matthias
Hi,
The rework is going to take a unspecified (and probably rather long) amount of time (I work on it when I have spare time and feel like working on it, and apart from the buttons, I don't even have the design fully prepared) and it will be just another option. It definitely won't be in Fedora 12 and I won't even push it to Fedora (even rawhide, due to the nature of development) until it is both feature complete and well tested. The current style (with possible minor updates) will stay available in a similar way like Clearlooks engine provides e.g. CLASSIC style. Also, some of the goals are to prepare for possible changes in widget theming in Gtk3 and making it easier to create QT4 variant of the theme.
As an author of the engine, I'd be biased in the opinion whether to use Clearlooks or Nodoka in F12, so I can only assure you that Nodoka will stay same in F12 as is in F11 (sans progress-entry support used e.g. in Rawhide's Epiphany and some minor fixes here and there).
If you don't want radical visual changes, stay with Nodoka for F12, and when the rework gets completed we can reevaluate whether we want to stay with "classic" Nodoka, go with the updated Nodoka, or revert to Clearlooks (or whatever will be the upstream default by then).
Martin
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 9:17 PM, Matthias Clasenmclasen@redhat.com wrote:
Hey all,
we've been discussing the idea of changing the default GTK+/Metacity theme in F12. Nodoka has been the default for a while, and it seems to undergo a major rework now ( http://mso-chronicles.blogspot.com/ ).
We don't want to do a radical visual change, though. The idea is to go back to the upstream default, Clearlooks.
Let me know what you think. I'd like to make this change for the alpha.
Well we should have some kind of theme that is connected with fedora, so that people can say "this is probably a fedora system". Like ubuntu can be easily recognized by this.
Having Nodoka as the default theme somehow gives us this "unique look".
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" -
Bill Nottingham -
Brian Pepple -
Christoph Wickert -
Colin Walters -
David Zeuthen -
drago01 -
Lennart Poettering -
Martin Sourada -
Matthias Clasen -
Nicu Buculei -
Paul W. Frields -
Tomasz Kisielewski -
William Jon McCann