towolf wrote: >> I also really don't think that forcing ugly icons on people is the right >> way to get them to change their dialogs. > That’s exactly the line of thought, unfortunately. > This is what Rodney, the g-i-t and icon-naming-utils maintainer said about > the issue: > [cut] > Also, the GTK_STOCK_EDIT icon is an icon that is often inappropriately > used, and I believe the metaphor is perhaps not too great. I think a > better goal would be to look at what metaphor/icon would be best in the > situations where GTK_STOCK_EDIT is currently being used, rather than > simply making the current icon look a bit prettier. In the latter case, > it will be "good enough" and other issues will be forgotten, while > keeping it as it is now, will make the icon stick out, and make people > want to fix it, like you want to do. However, I don't think simply > replacing the icon is the proper fix here.
So perhaps an alternative may be to have to ugly icons during the development cycle (like the test-usplash in edgy). That would make it easy to spot broken dialogs and file bugs/fix them. But before releasing replace the icons with nice ones so that our users are not scared away by an inconsistent and unprofessional-looking release. -- GTK default icons used in several places https://launchpad.net/bugs/60424 -- desktop-bugs mailing list desktop-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/desktop-bugs
