On dim., 2010-06-20 at 09:03 -0300, Valessio Brito wrote: > Imagine: Can I make a default installation and during the installation > process choose "netbook", he knows it will install: > themes-netbook-all, the whole environment must be customized in size, > fonts and style for small screens. I'm not sure we need a netbook task (especially about theme stuff), but even if we did, we only need to add correct dependencies. > > Another possibility is to install the subject site or a customized > debian, type themes-debianedu-all ... or themes-brdesktop-all ... > BrDesktop is adapting the theme to debian Brazilians. Having consistent naming might be nice, but I'm not sure it's that badly needed, and renaming all the themes for squeeze won't happen. What exactly is the point of splitting a theme in various sub-packages? I can understand the split icons/cursors/themes because of spaces issues, but I'm not sure we need to split kdm/gdm/usplash/whatever, since (afaik) it's only description, usually. Adding a theme in Debian would mean adding a lot of binary packages for no good reason, imho. And it means we need a metapackage if we don't want to “undermine the basic user select a theme complete” (I can't parse that sentence but I guess it can be decrypted as “undermine the user ability to select a complete theme” ?) For the directory structure, I'm not sure I see what you mean. Do you mean the source package structure or the binary one? (I guess it makes sense to split by folder, not sure if it's that badly needed to force people to use that structure, but eh, whatever) In the end, what I especially don't get is what the proposal is about? Rename all themes-related packages in Debian? Propose a common ground for Debian branding/artwork? You need to be more specific and clear about that because I have to admit I'm completely lost. Cheers, -- Yves-Alexis
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part