Hey Chris, I pretty much agree with you in regards to themes. Without strict rules, we can suddenly have floods of ~300 theme ebuilds and they'll all get added to the tree. I'd suggest another exception:
#3 It's ok to add themes to Portage if they are part of an official theme collection for a particular package. That way we have all the official themes - everything else would be up to the user to install. Portage was really designed for executable software, not for arbitrary collections of binary data (themes, ezines, etc.) Not that collecting/indexing those things is bad, just not really what Portage is aimed at. -Daniel On 2/26/07, Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 10:43 -0500, Daniel Gryniewicz wrote: > On Sun, 2007-02-25 at 21:31 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: > > Andrej Kacian wrote: > > > It makes sense slowly removing *applications* depending on gtk1. Themes should > > > go last, along with gtk1 itself. > > > > > > Gtk1 is already ugly enough, do you want it to be even more ugly? > > > > Point, set, and match. > > > > Much as I hate gtk1, I agree with this. Leave the themes as long as > they're working and there's apps. I'm just curious, but why? It's not like people can't get GTK+ themes themselves quite easily. Personally, I don't think we should have themes (for anything) in the tree except for two cases: #1. The theme is considered part of an upstream package set, fex. if GNOME or KDE ship with a small set of themes, they should be included #2. The themes are made by Gentoo For anything else, let the user download what they want and use it as they see fit. There's not much reason to track them in the package manager. That being said, I'm not opposed to the themes staying in the tree, either. I'm just trying to find out people's motivations for either keeping them/removing them. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering Strategic Lead Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee Gentoo Foundation
-- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
