Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > Pavel Sanda wrote: >> 1. new layout was proposed by Rob. who agrees/disagrees with this? > > I think it needs very careful auditing with regard to different workflow > scenarios. This has not happened yet, so I am against putting it in now.
While I personally like the new toolbars much better I agree that it is better to postpone this change to 2.1. "Release candidate" should mean "this will become the released version, unless a critical bug needs to be fixed". >> 2. some people won't be happy with icons change and there was proposal >> from me and supported by Enrico that we should allow to use older >> icons and in the same manner have prepared API in case somebody wants >> to add other sets like tango/libre office/windows standard/whatsoever. >> >> except Joost, how many people are against this? > > Me. This will end up like the "classic.ui" thing which is more or less > unmaintained. If that is really the case they could be removed again. I liked the idea of treating them like translations: If an icon set is too incomplete it gets removed. As long as Pavel and Enrico maintain the alternative sets and nobody else is required to put any work into them it is fine IMHO. > I propose we provide alternative icon sets via the wiki (but not ship it). BTW, I would have preferred the libre office icons, but anything is better than the current ones. Georg
