Re: Themes - do we package them?
On Sat, Feb 13, 1999 at 04:32:40PM +0000, Jules Bean wrote:
> E, wmaker, and GTK, to name but a few, are now becoming very themeable.
> There is some debate as to whether we should package them.
> In favour:
> Personally, I like as much as possible on my machine to be registered with
> the packaging system.
> Themes can contain lots of graphics and be quite large, bloating the
> Themes are generally distributed as tarballs and are trivial to install
> In my personal opinion, we should package them. As far as I'm concerned,
> the increasing size of the distribution is inevitable, and we're going to
> have to deal with it anyway - by better sectioning, using stow categories,
> whatever. And they may be trivial to untar, but it's nice to have them
> under control.
> We should probably split them into their own section or sections.
> Another idea which was brought up is making a separate site for them -
> I've little doubt that themes.org would be amenable to debian.themes.org
> if we asked them.
> However, this does seem silly, somehow. If it's free, why aren't we
> distributing it?
Well there are different types of themes, at least for gtk. Some of them are
actual code replacements like gtk-engines-thinice which I already have
packaged, it's about 16k or so and looks really nice. Then there are the
bloated pixmap themes which take up about a meg and are really slow. I'm not
sure, maybe we could only package the smaller ones?
|Stephen Crowley email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org |
|Debian GNU/Linux http://www.debian.org |
|GPG Key http://va.debian.org/~crow/public.key |
\--- 8A8B 3B82 6EA7 CF4E 01A5 5B21 B378 981D D2E1 0D85 ----/