Emmanuel Briot wrote:
>> Actually, I meant to do that too, but must have forgotten.
>> I agree, we should only show bindings up to the version we support
>> perhaps (is that 2.6 or 2.8? I can't remember).
>>
>> This list is not updated by anyone except us though. The problem is
>> that it will defi
Cody Russell wrote:
> While you guys are talking about website stuff again, on a side note I
> want to mention the information about IRC stuff on the webpage:
>
> http://www.gtk.org/development.html
>
> This page mentions #gtk-devel as a place where team meetings occur, but
> there has been a lot
While you guys are talking about website stuff again, on a side note I
want to mention the information about IRC stuff on the webpage:
http://www.gtk.org/development.html
This page mentions #gtk-devel as a place where team meetings occur, but
there has been a lot of traffic to this channel recent
Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 15:44 +0100, Emmanuel Briot wrote:
>
>>> Actually, I meant to do that too, but must have forgotten.
>>> I agree, we should only show bindings up to the version we support
>>> perhaps (is that 2.6 or 2.8? I can't remember).
>>>
>>> This list is not up
Alberto Ruiz wrote:
> 2008/3/26, Martyn Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Alberto Ruiz wrote:
>>> 2008/3/26, Martyn Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi Murray,
I have to say, first and foremost, I agree with Micke. The language
bindings are about other languages which are available fo
On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 15:44 +0100, Emmanuel Briot wrote:
> > Actually, I meant to do that too, but must have forgotten.
> > I agree, we should only show bindings up to the version we support
> > perhaps (is that 2.6 or 2.8? I can't remember).
> >
> > This list is not updated by anyone except us th
> Actually, I meant to do that too, but must have forgotten.
> I agree, we should only show bindings up to the version we support
> perhaps (is that 2.6 or 2.8? I can't remember).
>
> This list is not updated by anyone except us though. The problem is
> that it will definitely become out of date u
2008/3/26, Martyn Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Alberto Ruiz wrote:
> > 2008/3/26, Martyn Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >>
> >> Hi Murray,
> >>
> >> I have to say, first and foremost, I agree with Micke. The language
> >> bindings are about other languages which are available for use with
> >>
Alberto Ruiz wrote:
> 2008/3/26, Martyn Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>> Hi Murray,
>>
>> I have to say, first and foremost, I agree with Micke. The language
>> bindings are about other languages which are available for use with
>> GTK+. This is not GNOME. I really think having a small GNOME foot
2008/3/26, Martyn Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
> Hi Murray,
>
> I have to say, first and foremost, I agree with Micke. The language
> bindings are about other languages which are available for use with
> GTK+. This is not GNOME. I really think having a small GNOME foot (or
> another icon) for i
Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 17:26 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
>> On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 15:41 +, Martyn Russell wrote:
>>> We are not ignoring it, it is a planned change. There are one or two and
>>> we have had quite a few improvement requests since going live - we will
>>> b
On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 11:35 +0100, Mikael Hallendal wrote:
> 26 mar 2008 kl. 11.10 skrev Murray Cumming:
>
> Hi,
>
> > On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 10:18 +0100, Mikael Hallendal wrote:
> >> 25 mar 2008 kl. 08.58 skrev Murray Cumming:
> >> but it's not given and GTK+ is not only for GNOME. The GNOME
> >>
26 mar 2008 kl. 11.10 skrev Murray Cumming:
Hi,
> On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 10:18 +0100, Mikael Hallendal wrote:
>> 25 mar 2008 kl. 08.58 skrev Murray Cumming:
>> but it's not given and GTK+ is not only for GNOME. The GNOME
>> bindings include (and require) a wider set of library bindings than
>> G
On Wed, 2008-03-26 at 10:18 +0100, Mikael Hallendal wrote:
> 25 mar 2008 kl. 08.58 skrev Murray Cumming:
>
> Hi,
>
> > On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 17:26 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> >> On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 15:41 +, Martyn Russell wrote:
> >>> Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 13
25 mar 2008 kl. 08.58 skrev Murray Cumming:
Hi,
> On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 17:26 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
>> On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 15:41 +, Martyn Russell wrote:
>>> Murray Cumming wrote:
On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 13:16 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> And I still believe that the officia
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 17:26 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 15:41 +, Martyn Russell wrote:
> > Murray Cumming wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 13:16 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > >> And I still believe that the official GNOME bindings deserve to be in
> > >> a
> > >>
Nice!
Having SVG allows to produce nearly all other formats so that's OK.
One possible addition could be some icon sized PNGs (tweaked for small
size). If I have some time I'll try make them and post them on l.g.o.
Christophe
On Jan 30, 2008 1:11 PM, Andreas Nilsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 05:26:33PM +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > This link will have to be kept up to date, if this is the link to use,
> > it would be better to have a more permanent link that doesn't change
> > with new versions of GNOME (which we used to have).
>
> Theoretically,
> http://w
Murray Cumming wrote:
> > what is most unfortunate is that library.g.o only has glib development
> > docs, but not gtk development docs.
>
> That's probably because there are no tarball releases of GTK+ from svn
> trunk at the moment. library.gnome.org can only use tarballs, I believe.
That is t
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 15:41 +, Martyn Russell wrote:
> Murray Cumming wrote:
> > On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 13:16 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
> >> And I still believe that the official GNOME bindings deserve to be in
> >> a
> >> separate section.
> >
> > I see that the site is live already. Pleas
Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 13:16 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
>> And I still believe that the official GNOME bindings deserve to be in
>> a
>> separate section.
>
> I see that the site is live already. Please don't just ignore this
> regression. I've mentioned it before too.
Hi
On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 13:16 +0100, Murray Cumming wrote:
>
> And I still believe that the official GNOME bindings deserve to be in
> a
> separate section.
I see that the site is live already. Please don't just ignore this
regression. I've mentioned it before too.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.murray
Andreas Nilsson wrote:
> Christophe Dehais wrote:
>
>> Talking about the logo (which is very nice - simple and cool, like gtk
>> :)), what about a page where one's could get it in different formats
>> (svg, png, icon sized, etc.) ?
>>
>>
> Hi Christophe!
> Sounds like something that shou
Claudio Saavedra wrote:
> El dom, 27-01-2008 a las 23:37 +, Martyn Russell escribió:
>> The plan is to upload these pages on Tuesday sometime. If anyone has
>> any issues to take up before then, let me know.
>
> A small correction. In documentation.html
>
> "GTK+ 2.0 Tree View
> This tutorial
El dom, 27-01-2008 a las 23:37 +, Martyn Russell escribió:
>
> The plan is to upload these pages on Tuesday sometime. If anyone has
> any issues to take up before then, let me know.
A small correction. In documentation.html
"GTK+ 2.0 Tree View
This tutorial covers the GtkTreeView and was wr
On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Shawn Amundson wrote:
> Martyn Russell wrote:
>> no sysadmins seems to be stepping forward regarding this.
>>
>> As a result, this will have to wait.
>>
>
> I'm willing to do whatever it takes to help improve gtk.org. As
> such, I will provide my services as sysadmin.
thank
On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 15:46 +0100, Tim Janik wrote:
[snip]
> what is most unfortunate is that library.g.o only has glib development
> docs, but not gtk development docs.
That's probably because there are no tarball releases of GTK+ from svn
trunk at the moment. library.gnome.org can only use tarba
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Olav Vitters wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 02:30:14PM +, Martyn Russell wrote:
>>> http://imendio.com/~martyn/gtk/draft-final/download-linux.html
>>> * outdated versions
>>
>> You disagree? It might not make sense to list unsupported versions here
>> I agree, but we sh
Michael L Torrie (sorta) wrote:
> I'm always amused by people who have big, hires screens and want to
> maximize windows. In my opinion, on a 20" wide screen, I want
> layouts to be narrow enough to be in a nice tall window that's narrow
> enough to allow easy reading.
It's funny that you use
Philippe De Swert wrote:
> What annoys me the most (especially on my wide-screen monitor) is that I have
> a very thin GTK+ website which requires me to scroll down a lot. And I don't
> like to have to view a website in 10:16 screen as it is quite unpractical. It
> is pretty hard to swivel a 22" sc
On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 02:30:14PM +, Martyn Russell wrote:
> > http://imendio.com/~martyn/gtk/draft-final/download-linux.html
> > * outdated versions
>
> You disagree? It might not make sense to list unsupported versions here
> I agree, but we should definitely list older versions.
No, I me
Vincent Untz wrote:
> Le lundi 28 janvier 2008, à 01:25 +0100, Andreas Nilsson a écrit :
>> Olav Vitters wrote:
>>> http://imendio.com/~martyn/gtk/draft-final/development.html
>>> * links to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for donation things, shouldn't
>>>that rather use some private email address? IIRC th
Olav Vitters wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 27, 2008 at 11:37:47PM +, Martyn Russell wrote:
> Looks great. Tried to find very small things to note (nothing important):
>
> http://imendio.com/~martyn/gtk/draft-final/index.html
> * LGPL link is the v3 one
Fixed.
> http://imendio.com/~martyn/gtk/draft-f
Christophe Dehais wrote:
> Hi !
>
> On Jan 28, 2008 10:48 AM, Martyn Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>> Logo: fresh look, I like it. However, it looks slightly distorted to me,
>>> if it is supposed to resemble a perfect cube. As you know, all parallel
>>> lines in a perspective projecti
Philippe De Swert wrote:
>> The new site look great. A few nit picks:
>>
>> features.html
>> * Language Bindings
>> Missing 2.12 column which should contain: gtkmm, pygtk, java-gnome, gtk2perl.
>> * Foundations
>> Missing new features from GIO and also GObject
What about GModule, GFoo, GBar, GWhat
Hi,
> >
> > The final draft of the new GTK+ web site has been complete with help
> > from Andreas Nilsson and are now available here:
> >
> > http://imendio.com/~martyn/gtk/draft-final/
Nice work!
> > The plan is to upload these pages on Tuesday sometime. If anyone has any
> > issues to tak
On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 09:26 -0200, Johan Dahlin wrote:
> Martyn Russell wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > The final draft of the new GTK+ web site has been complete with help
> > from Andreas Nilsson and are now available here:
> >
> > http://imendio.com/~martyn/gtk/draft-final/
> >
> > The plan is to u
Martyn Russell wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The final draft of the new GTK+ web site has been complete with help
> from Andreas Nilsson and are now available here:
>
> http://imendio.com/~martyn/gtk/draft-final/
>
> The plan is to upload these pages on Tuesday sometime. If anyone has any
> issues to take
28 jan 2008 kl. 10.48 skrev Martyn Russell:
Hi,
> Bastiaan Veelo wrote:
>
>> Logo: fresh look, I like it. However, it looks slightly distorted
>> to me,
>> if it is supposed to resemble a perfect cube. As you know, all
>> parallel
>> lines in a perspective projection share a common vanishing
Le lundi 28 janvier 2008, à 01:27 +0100, Andreas Nilsson a écrit :
> Vincent Untz wrote:
> > Le dimanche 27 janvier 2008, à 23:37 +, Martyn Russell a écrit :
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> The final draft of the new GTK+ web site has been complete with help
> >> from Andreas Nilsson and are now avai
Le lundi 28 janvier 2008, à 01:25 +0100, Andreas Nilsson a écrit :
> Olav Vitters wrote:
> > http://imendio.com/~martyn/gtk/draft-final/development.html
> > * links to [EMAIL PROTECTED] for donation things, shouldn't
> >that rather use some private email address? IIRC there is a
> >better
Hi !
On Jan 28, 2008 10:48 AM, Martyn Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Logo: fresh look, I like it. However, it looks slightly distorted to me,
> > if it is supposed to resemble a perfect cube. As you know, all parallel
> > lines in a perspective projection share a common vanishing point.
Bastiaan Veelo wrote:
> Hi,
Hi,
> First off: congratulations with a clean site, good first impressions. I
> am not a GTK+ dev, but I happened to see your post and take the liberty
> to share my small comments.
Thanks, it has taken long enough :)
> Logo: fresh look, I like it. However, it looks
Hi,
First off: congratulations with a clean site, good first impressions. I
am not a GTK+ dev, but I happened to see your post and take the liberty
to share my small comments.
Logo: fresh look, I like it. However, it looks slightly distorted to me,
if it is supposed to resemble a perfect cube.
Andreas Nilsson wrote:
> Olav Vitters wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jan 27, 2008 at 11:37:47PM +, Martyn Russell wrote:
>>
>> http://imendio.com/~martyn/gtk/draft-final/
>>
>> http://imendio.com/~martyn/gtk/draft-final/documentation.html
>> * under API, perhaps s/Library/Component/ or somet
Martyn Russell wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The final draft of the new GTK+ web site has been complete with help
> from Andreas Nilsson and are now available here:
>
> http://imendio.com/~martyn/gtk/draft-final/
>
> The plan is to upload these pages on Tuesday sometime. If anyone has any
> issues to take
[snip]
On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 01:25:51AM +0100, Andreas Nilsson wrote:
> > http://imendio.com/~martyn/gtk/draft-final/features.html
> > * no n810
> >
> Latest and greatest should totally be there. Perhaps we should only use
> the n810 there. Saying only the N-series would save us from fixing
Vincent Untz wrote:
> Le dimanche 27 janvier 2008, à 23:37 +, Martyn Russell a écrit :
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> The final draft of the new GTK+ web site has been complete with help
>> from Andreas Nilsson and are now available here:
>>
>> http://imendio.com/~martyn/gtk/draft-final/
>>
>> The plan is
Olav Vitters wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 27, 2008 at 11:37:47PM +, Martyn Russell wrote:
>
>> The final draft of the new GTK+ web site has been complete with help
>> from Andreas Nilsson and are now available here:
>>
>> http://imendio.com/~martyn/gtk/draft-final/
>>
>> The plan is to upload thes
Le dimanche 27 janvier 2008, à 23:37 +, Martyn Russell a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> The final draft of the new GTK+ web site has been complete with help
> from Andreas Nilsson and are now available here:
>
> http://imendio.com/~martyn/gtk/draft-final/
>
> The plan is to upload these pages on Tuesda
On Sun, Jan 27, 2008 at 11:37:47PM +, Martyn Russell wrote:
> The final draft of the new GTK+ web site has been complete with help
> from Andreas Nilsson and are now available here:
>
> http://imendio.com/~martyn/gtk/draft-final/
>
> The plan is to upload these pages on Tuesday sometime. If
On Sun, 2008-01-27 at 23:37 +, Martyn Russell wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The final draft of the new GTK+ web site has been complete with help
> from Andreas Nilsson and are now available here:
>
> http://imendio.com/~martyn/gtk/draft-final/
it's very, very cool. kudos to you and Andreas: you lot di
Hi,
The final draft of the new GTK+ web site has been complete with help
from Andreas Nilsson and are now available here:
http://imendio.com/~martyn/gtk/draft-final/
The plan is to upload these pages on Tuesday sometime. If anyone has any
issues to take up before then, let me know.
--
Regard
Martyn Russell wrote:
...
>
> Well, that would probably be ideal and perhaps possible if the hardware
> was permitting but it isn't and as we found from this recent thread:
>
> http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-devel-list/2008-January/msg00047.html
>
> no sysadmins seems to be stepping forward
Hi,
I have been toying with the idea and asking people's opinions on keeping
a list of core maintainers on the new GTK+ website (which will be up for
final review this weekend hopefully).
The idea here is to list people and their affiliation. On the current
pages we list a handful of people which
Mohammed Sameer wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 09:44:01AM +, Martyn Russell wrote:
>> Murray Cumming wrote:
>>> HTML is slightly more likely to be kept-up-to-date than DocBook.
>>> However, no FAQ is likely to be kept up to date unless it's very
>>> easy to edit/comment.
>> Well, given the n
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 09:44:01AM +, Martyn Russell wrote:
> Murray Cumming wrote:
> > HTML is slightly more likely to be kept-up-to-date than DocBook.
> > However, no FAQ is likely to be kept up to date unless it's very easy to
> > edit/comment.
>
> Well, given the new site has proper CSS an
Martyn Russell wrote:
> Actually, I noticed that it is on the wiki actually:
>
> http://library.gnome.org/devel/gtk-faq/stable/
>
> How is it put there, just simply generated from docbook and slightly
> updated to fit into the style of the pages?
It is generated from the source tarballs, file
Shawn Amundson wrote:
> Martyn Russell wrote:
>> 2. With regards to the FAQ, is there a burning need to have this in a
>> docbook format? Currently it is a mess and I am thinking of reforming
>> it, but before I do, I wonder if we should just put it completely in
>> HTML and as part of the website.
Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 15:05 +, Martyn Russell wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I will be posting my final review of the gtk.org pages in the coming few
>> weeks and I wanted people's opinions on a few things.
>>
>> 1. Would anyone object to putting the Windows binaries on the gtk
Martyn Russell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I will be posting my final review of the gtk.org pages in the coming few
> weeks and I wanted people's opinions on a few things.
>
> 1. Would anyone object to putting the Windows binaries on the gtk.org
> site instead of Tor's site? It makes sense to me to have
On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 15:05 +, Martyn Russell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I will be posting my final review of the gtk.org pages in the coming few
> weeks and I wanted people's opinions on a few things.
>
> 1. Would anyone object to putting the Windows binaries on the gtk.org
> site instead of Tor'
Tor Lillqvist wrote:
>> 1. Would anyone object to putting the Windows binaries on the gtk.org
>> site instead of Tor's site? It makes sense to me to have it there. Tor,
>> any input here?
>
> The binaries *are* on ftp.gtk.org (actually more completely on
> ftp.gnome.org). With my "site" you probab
> 1. Would anyone object to putting the Windows binaries on the gtk.org
> site instead of Tor's site? It makes sense to me to have it there. Tor,
> any input here?
The binaries *are* on ftp.gtk.org (actually more completely on
ftp.gnome.org). With my "site" you probably mean the
www.gimp.org/win32
Hi all,
I will be posting my final review of the gtk.org pages in the coming few
weeks and I wanted people's opinions on a few things.
1. Would anyone object to putting the Windows binaries on the gtk.org
site instead of Tor's site? It makes sense to me to have it there. Tor,
any input here?
2.
Alberto Ruiz wrote:
> 2007/10/10, Mathias Hasselmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Am Mittwoch, den 10.10.2007, 11:08 +0100 schrieb Alberto Ruiz:
>>> The light in the middle of the cube (in the center corner) doesn't
>>> help to make contrast with the white letters.
>>> Tango suggests to use the upper le
2007/10/10, Mathias Hasselmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Am Mittwoch, den 10.10.2007, 11:08 +0100 schrieb Alberto Ruiz:
> > The light in the middle of the cube (in the center corner) doesn't
> > help to make contrast with the white letters.
> > Tango suggests to use the upper left corner as a light
Am Mittwoch, den 10.10.2007, 18:11 -0400 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> Message body is too big: 173477 bytes with a limit of 100 KB
So I'll resend:
> Am Mittwoch, den 10.10.2007, 11:08 +0100 schrieb Alberto Ruiz:
> > The light in the middle of the cube (in the center corner) doesn't
> > help to ma
On Wed, 2007-10-10 at 09:25 +0100, Martyn Russell wrote:
> Mathias Hasselmann wrote:
> > Am Montag, den 08.10.2007, 11:36 +0200 schrieb Kristian Rietveld:
> >> On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 04:22:09PM +0100, Alberto Ruiz wrote:
> >>> Have anyone seen this[0] one? I think it's a great improvement
> over
2007/10/10, Martyn Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Mathias Hasselmann wrote:
> > Am Montag, den 08.10.2007, 11:36 +0200 schrieb Kristian Rietveld:
> >> On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 04:22:09PM +0100, Alberto Ruiz wrote:
> >>> Have anyone seen this[0] one? I think it's a great improvement over
> the
> >>
Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-05-29 at 11:40 +0100, Martyn Russell wrote: [snip]
>>> Under Language Bindings on the same page, i believe that
>>> gtk2-perl has had full support for 2.0 and 2.2 for quite some
>>> time now.
> [snip]
>
> As the original page says, these have always been self-r
Mathias Hasselmann wrote:
> Am Montag, den 08.10.2007, 11:36 +0200 schrieb Kristian Rietveld:
>> On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 04:22:09PM +0100, Alberto Ruiz wrote:
>>> Have anyone seen this[0] one? I think it's a great improvement over the
>>> original one. And as Xan said, we avoid the
>>> aqua-and-rou
Am Montag, den 08.10.2007, 11:36 +0200 schrieb Kristian Rietveld:
> On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 04:22:09PM +0100, Alberto Ruiz wrote:
> > Have anyone seen this[0] one? I think it's a great improvement over the
> > original one. And as Xan said, we avoid the
> > aqua-and-rounded-corners-mac-and-web20-li
On 10/7/07, Christophe Dehais <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ok guys, one more cube here.
> again, no color, just to see how the shapes look like.
I think it looks very good and the current sketched box icon is ugly.
It is impossible to make it look good at different resolutions.
--
mvh Björn
On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 04:22:09PM +0100, Alberto Ruiz wrote:
> Have anyone seen this[0] one? I think it's a great improvement over the
> original one. And as Xan said, we avoid the
> aqua-and-rounded-corners-mac-and-web20-like look and feel :)
>
> [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:GTK.svg
I
2007/10/7, Christophe Dehais <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> On 10/7/07, Salvatore De Paolis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Keep it as a joke, but this logo looks like a suppository:)
>
> true! I hope nobody will think we finally have the "message" of the
> toolkit :)
Have anyone seen this[0] one? I thi
On 10/7/07, Salvatore De Paolis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Keep it as a joke, but this logo looks like a suppository:)
true! I hope nobody will think we finally have the "message" of the toolkit :)
Christophe
> S.
> ___
> gtk-devel-list mailing list
On Sun, 2007-10-07 at 13:30 +0200, Christophe Dehais wrote:
> ok guys, one more cube here.
> again, no color, just to see how the shapes look like.
>
> feel free to bash the idea.
I think the shapes look very nice.
___
gtk-devel-list mailing list
gtk-
On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 12:51:23 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The box *looks* awesome, it just needs some gradient or texture in it to
> give it the fashion trend you are looking for.
I agree with the box too.
It just needs to be updated to the 2.12.
Imho, a complete change of the logo needs some
Am Sonntag, den 07.10.2007, 12:51 +0200 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 12:45:23PM +0300, Xan Lopez wrote:
> > On 10/7/07, Mikael Hallendal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > 6 okt 2007 kl. 19.41 skrev Christophe Dehais:
> > > For what it's worth, I like it a lot!
> > >
> > > I p
On Sun, Oct 07, 2007 at 12:45:23PM +0300, Xan Lopez wrote:
> On 10/7/07, Mikael Hallendal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 6 okt 2007 kl. 19.41 skrev Christophe Dehais:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > For what it's worth, I like it a lot!
> >
> > I personally like it much better than a variant of the current ske
On 10/7/07, Mikael Hallendal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 6 okt 2007 kl. 19.41 skrev Christophe Dehais:
>
> Hi,
>
> For what it's worth, I like it a lot!
>
> I personally like it much better than a variant of the current skewed
> box.
I wonder if I'm the only person alive that really likes the GTK
6 okt 2007 kl. 19.41 skrev Christophe Dehais:
Hi,
For what it's worth, I like it a lot!
I personally like it much better than a variant of the current skewed
box.
Cheers,
Micke
> Hi list!
>
> Today, I got bored of my work, so I played a bit with Inskape and came
> up with another logo pro
Hi list!
Today, I got bored of my work, so I played a bit with Inskape and came
up with another logo proposition. I can't get anything inspiring out
of the "cube" design, so here is a completely different approach. It's
not very colorful, but maybe the original blue green and red colors
could find
Hi,
It might be an idea to link the list items in the "Interfaces" and
"Foundations" section of the features page to the relevant parts of the
API documentation on library.gnome.org. That is, unless the features
page isn't meant for programmers.
You might also want to insert some more whitespace
Hi,
I finally got round to finishing these pages for a second review.
You can test the latest version here:
http://imendio.com/~martyn/gtk/draft2b/about.html
I have changed a few things compared to draft 1 which I initially did:
- Fixed the pages so they work on devices like the N800.
- F
Le mardi 29 mai 2007, à 11:43 +0100, Martyn Russell a écrit :
> Jonathon Conte wrote:
> > I'm fairly new to GTK+ development. One of the main things to hinder my
> > adoption of GTK+ was the lack of up-to-date documentation oriented
> > towards those not familiar with GTK+and GLib. Fortunately a ve
On Tue, 2007-05-29 at 11:40 +0100, Martyn Russell wrote:
[snip]
> > Under Language Bindings on the same page, i believe that gtk2-perl has
> > had full support for 2.0 and 2.2 for quite some time now.
[snip]
As the original page says, these have always been self-reported "supported"
statuses.
It
Jonathon Conte wrote:
> I'm fairly new to GTK+ development. One of the main things to hinder my
> adoption of GTK+ was the lack of up-to-date documentation oriented
> towards those not familiar with GTK+and GLib. Fortunately a very
> thorough book that breaks down this barrier, "Foundations of GTK+
muppet wrote:
Just including the list in the reply.
> On May 28, 2007, at 2:15 PM, Martyn Russell wrote:
>> Architecture
>>
>> GTK+ is based on three libraries ...
>>
>> * Glib ...
>> * Pango ...
>> * Cairo ...
>> * ATK ...
>
> Makes me think, "Our chief weapon is fear. And surp
Martyn Russell skrev:
> Murray Cumming wrote:
Hi,
Great work Martyn!
>> More importantly, I'd rather not have "Gimp Toolkit" in the page
>> heading. For me that's a bit like having "GNU Network Object Model
>> Environment" on a GNOME page. It's not relevant, it's distracting, and
>> it's a bit t
2007/5/29, Mathias Hasselmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Am Dienstag, den 29.05.2007, 01:31 +0200 schrieb Felix Rabe (public):
> > >>> I wonder where the GTK logo proposal went? I think it would fit quite
> > >>> well in this design.
> > >> Actually Andreas was doing some work there. I was sent a few
Am Dienstag, den 29.05.2007, 01:31 +0200 schrieb Felix Rabe (public):
> >>> I wonder where the GTK logo proposal went? I think it would fit quite
> >>> well in this design.
> >> Actually Andreas was doing some work there. I was sent a few ideas and
> >> they looked good, but nothing further so far
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Here is my take at the GTK+ logo. It is just a proposal, since it needs
some optimization for icon sizes (I think). Remember that the original
was from Christophe Dehais:
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-devel-list/2007-April/msg00118.html
Felix
On Tue, 2007-05-29 at 00:08 +0100, Martyn Russell wrote:
> I agree. I did look into frames, etc to get around this, but that
> causes
> more problems than it solves. The main problem here is that the FAQ is
> generated, so we would need some post-docbook fix up script to do
> something here. It is
Hi,
If the headers prevent text to be black, I think headers should look
different :) - Maybe use underlines (width=100%)?
You might experiment with putting the text into the -- which
should be there... why did you put the text next to the logo into the
image file too? -- so it reads "GTK+ Over
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Martyn Russell wrote:
> Cody Russell wrote:
>> On Mon, 2007-05-28 at 19:15 +0100, Martyn Russell wrote:
>>> * What are people's thoughts on the initial look and feel?
>> It looks great, except for the FAQ. Can it be styled similarly to the
>> rest of
Cody Russell wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-05-28 at 19:15 +0100, Martyn Russell wrote:
>> * What are people's thoughts on the initial look and feel?
>
> It looks great, except for the FAQ. Can it be styled similarly to the
> rest of the site and include the navigation bar at the top?
I agree. I did look
Felix Rabe (public) wrote:
> Hi Martyn,
>
> Martyn Russell wrote:
>> Hi,
>
>> Over the last few weeks, I have spent time putting together the new
>> website for gtk.org. I decided it would be easier to start from scratch
>> reusing the original content.
>
>> I have put the new pages up here for
On Mon, 2007-05-28 at 19:15 +0100, Martyn Russell wrote:
> * What are people's thoughts on the initial look and feel?
It looks great, except for the FAQ. Can it be styled similarly to the
rest of the site and include the navigation bar at the top?
___
1 - 100 of 106 matches
Mail list logo
