|
From: | Riccardo Mottola |
Subject: | Re: GNUstep don't load images of current theme. |
Date: | Sat, 20 Jul 2013 16:26:07 +0200 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:22.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/22.0 SeaMonkey/2.19 |
Hi, Quentin Mathé wrote:
I disagree here. I think we shouldn't complicate GNUstep to follow different theming styles. Our Theme stuff, even if incomplete, is already quite a maze. I think Thematic should be central part of a pixmap theme design or, in case, conversion. Thus a "port" of an existing theme should be done from Thematic. If there are certain styles or standard to adapt, it should have an "import" feature, but "saving" should generate a standard-style gnustep theme.The main motivation behind the change was to make easier to port existing themes. For porting a pixmap theme, I think Thematic is not the right choice. The porting should be simple as possible: put the images in some directories inside a theme bundle and just edit some plist files for the name mapping. The approach we implemented with Eric supports this, and bring the following benefits:
This doesn't mean GS's theming mechanism shouldn't be improved. I try to create 3 themes since years and struggle quite a bit and currently I gave up on one of them, because of the difficulty of setting the colors as I want.
But this implies clearly another level of mapping which we currently can avoid: just drop the images in the ThemeImages directory and they work. This is useful also because Thematic doesn't support al controls and most of the theming is currently done by replacing directly the images in its images inspector.- the image are looked up through a mapping so the image file name doesn't matter (you can keep the original theme image name for the image file, it's a very important point to make easy to port and track changes in ported themes)
Agreed that it is difficult. I don't care about how the colors are written. THe problem is currently knowing which colours to modify and what they effect, this is absolutely not easy. Again I think thematic is the solution for setting them, I'm not interested in the manual intervention in a theme bundle. I think we have essentially "too few colors", thus I cannot selectively change some colors without affecting others.- color customization (would be nice to support a single human-readable plist which can contain eithe RGB or Web color instead of multiple binary plists)
That's a problem even Windows has. The advantage is that it always works, but the disadvantage is of course "lack of consistency", thus I essentially agree.- turn the GNUstep default theme into a real bundle (the theming code and the image lookup is more complex than it ought to be because the default theme isn't a real theme bundle)
Ok, let's see, I'll test it with my themes. I had Sleek quite close finally to a first decent release, so this was kind of a set-back. We might discuss colouring in a separate thread. Right now I just put the development of the "dark" ThinkDark theme on hold.1. it must be backward compatible and continue to use the old image names where themes still use them 2. it must be OSX compatible ... not introducing new incompatible naming for any of the standard OSX images 3. existing GNUstep software must be updated in sync with it (ie existing themes and Thematic.app must be updated to support new changes)The change was intented to comply with 1) and 2), and not require 3). I'll fix the bugs in the current code and ensure it works correctly with various existing themes and Thematic without requiring any changes.
Riccardo
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |