icon naming spec project on launchpad?
dobey.pwns at gmail.com
Mon Jun 29 18:40:31 PDT 2009
On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 15:51 +0200, Kenneth Wimer wrote:
> Well, that is not strictly true. We did have a discussion or two about
> it in the past but nothing concrete came out of it.
Right. Let's change that then. Congratulations. You are now a
co-maintainer of the spec. What I meant by my statement though,
was that nobody has enough free time, willingness, or cares enough
to take on the task by themselves.
> I would love to help if you'll take me ;) It seems to me that the
> first thing needed is a more formal request process. It gets quite
> hard following a discussion about an icon in an app on a desktop you
> don't use - and nobody can be expected to install, use, understand and
> like everything.
Yes. Which is why we need more discussion from both sides. GNOME
developers demanding icons go in the spec, and no input from KDE or XFCE
developers isn't very helpful either. And I think your work in both KDE
and the Ubuntu artwork community could help with that as well, by
stirring up a few people into discussing the requests.
> In addition, much of these requests get lost/forgotten after a first
> decision has been made: collating the information and storing it for
> the future would be better. At least I know it would help me :p
Another reason to suggest using Launchpad Bugs to track their status.
It provides meaningful status field information, priority, and threaded
comments via the web and e-mail. It provides a nice place where only
the relevant pieces can be viewed, unlike the current mailing list,
which can get easily bogged down by unrelated threads, leaving the
icon naming mails somewhere way down in the folder making them harder
to find and track.
> Anyway, I'll help, if you'd like.
I would very much appreciate your help. Welcome aboard. :)
The first thing we need to do is decide on a method of tracking icon
requests and dealing with discussions on them. Which is what this
thread was for, until it became yet another flamewar about the spec.
I vote for using Launchpad Bugs for this, for the several reasons I've
already stated a couple times now. I'm not going to force people to use
it if the general consensus is not to, though, which is why we have this
thread, so that people can present alternate or better solutions. Using
LP Bugs wouldn't be a permanent solution, but simply something to use
which will more than suffice, until we can get a more specific solution
designed, implemented, and deployed.
What do you think new co-maintainer?
More information about the xdg