On Tue, 2002-11-12 at 20:42, Jeff Waugh wrote: > > Hmm, well, no derivative can be called BlueCurve; only the single > > original theme can be called BlueCurve. I don't really see where it > > could get confusing; unless you mean theme engines? In that case, one > > can have an engine called bluecurve and an engine called wonderland > > installed at the same time; just so long as authors only make themes > > that use the wonderland engine, it should be good, no? > > I made a theme called "DeepIce". It's a quick gtkrc-only hack on ThinIce so > that it doesn't look so depressingly blue. Just changing the settings and > colours a bit. > > If ThinIce was called "SmackHappy" on Red Hat machines, and ThinIce > everywhere else, my theme would break for all Red Hat users. Should I > distributed a separate theme called "DeepSmack" for them? No, that won't happen unless we can't even use libbluecurve.so for the theme engine name. If you base your theme on thinice, all that matters is the name of the library that implements the engine, not the visible name. > When I start shipping my "DeepIceCollection" metatheme, which theme > (gtk1|gtk2|metacity|icons) do I point to? Do I make a "DeepSmackCollection"? That's a different problem. But given that "metatheme" have like 3 items, it's not really a big deal. > What about more advanced engine themes? > > Sure, perhaps it's just an inconvenience - but it does create a subtle > incompatibility between GNOME desktops. That's bad. Will further use of > trademarks affect Free Software cooperation on a larger scale? Should we > accept this, or advocate better behaviour? Is it worth the hassle for some > (high quality) themes? Read above and chill. -- /Bastien Nocera http://hadess.net Perfection is reached, not when there is no longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away. Antoine de Saint-Exupery
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part