Hi All,
Geany has in the past specified a fixed image, (the jewel encrusted teapot), as the icon to use for its top level window.
There has been a request for Geany to follow the icon set by the theme. This has been committed.
However one of the icons provided by some themes has caused some consternation.
So an option to continue to use the Geany icon instead of the theme has also been committed.
This mail is to get users preference for the default setting, use the Geany icon or use the theme icon (with the Geany one as a fallback if the theme has none).
Users can always change the setting at any time, this is only what should be the default.
Cheers Lex
On 12-10-14 12:05 AM, Lex Trotman wrote:
Hi All,
Geany has in the past specified a fixed image, (the jewel encrusted teapot), as the icon to use for its top level window.
There has been a request for Geany to follow the icon set by the theme. This has been committed.
However one of the icons provided by some themes has caused some consternation.
So an option to continue to use the Geany icon instead of the theme has also been committed.
This mail is to get users preference for the default setting, use the Geany icon or use the theme icon (with the Geany one as a fallback if the theme has none).
I think the default should be to follow the standard[1]:
"Icons and themes are looked for in a set of directories. By default, apps should look in $HOME/.icons (for backwards compatibility), in $XDG_DATA_DIRS/icons and in /usr/share/pixmaps (in that order). Applications may further add their own icon directories to this list, and users may extend or change the list (in application/desktop specific ways).In each of these directories themes are stored as subdirectories. A theme can be spread across several base directories by having subdirectories of the same name. This way users can extend and override system themes."
And then further down:
"It is recommended that the icons installed in the hicolor theme look neutral, since it is a fallback theme that will be used in combination with some very different looking themes. But if you don't have any neutral icon, please install whatever icon you have in the hicolor theme so that all applications get at least some icon in all themes."
And in another place:
"The lookup inside a theme is done in three phases. First all the directories are scanned for an exact match, e.g. one where the allowed size of the icon files match what was looked up. Then all the directories are scanned for any icon that matches the name. If that fails we finally fall back on unthemed icons. If we fail to find any icon at all it is up to the application to pick a good fallback, as the correct choice depends on the context."
So we should not, according to my interpretation, override the user's chosen icon theme icons and our own installed fallback hicolor icon with the hardcoded/inline/embedded icon unless no other icon can be found.
Users can always change the setting at any time, this is only what should be the default.
IMO, the setting is redundant because you can use the DE/GTK icon theme mechanisms to change what icon is used.
Cheers, Matthew Brush
[1] http://standards.freedesktop.org/icon-theme-spec/icon-theme-spec-latest.html
On 14 October 2012 18:30, Matthew Brush mbrush@codebrainz.ca wrote:
On 12-10-14 12:05 AM, Lex Trotman wrote:
Hi All,
Geany has in the past specified a fixed image, (the jewel encrusted teapot), as the icon to use for its top level window.
There has been a request for Geany to follow the icon set by the theme. This has been committed.
However one of the icons provided by some themes has caused some consternation.
So an option to continue to use the Geany icon instead of the theme has also been committed.
This mail is to get users preference for the default setting, use the Geany icon or use the theme icon (with the Geany one as a fallback if the theme has none).
I think the default should be to follow the standard[1]:
"Icons and themes are looked for in a set of directories. By default, apps should look in $HOME/.icons (for backwards compatibility), in $XDG_DATA_DIRS/icons and in /usr/share/pixmaps (in that order). Applications may further add their own icon directories to this list, and users may extend or change the list (in application/desktop specific ways).In each of these directories themes are stored as subdirectories. A theme can be spread across several base directories by having subdirectories of the same name. This way users can extend and override system themes."
And then further down:
"It is recommended that the icons installed in the hicolor theme look neutral, since it is a fallback theme that will be used in combination with some very different looking themes. But if you don't have any neutral icon, please install whatever icon you have in the hicolor theme so that all applications get at least some icon in all themes."
And in another place:
"The lookup inside a theme is done in three phases. First all the directories are scanned for an exact match, e.g. one where the allowed size of the icon files match what was looked up. Then all the directories are scanned for any icon that matches the name. If that fails we finally fall back on unthemed icons. If we fail to find any icon at all it is up to the application to pick a good fallback, as the correct choice depends on the context."
So we should not, according to my interpretation, override the user's chosen icon theme icons and our own installed fallback hicolor icon with the hardcoded/inline/embedded icon unless no other icon can be found.
That does not say that the user should *not* be able to choose to override the theme. That is another explicit user choice.
Users can always change the setting at any time, this is only what should
be the default.
IMO, the setting is redundant because you can use the DE/GTK icon theme mechanisms to change what icon is use
The DE/GTK mechanism is complex, varies and needs to be applied to each theme, this is simple. For the few lines the setting requires, it seems silly to question having a setting that can make both groups of users happy, hence the question is only what the default choice should be.
Cheers Lex
Cheers, Matthew Brush
[1] http://standards.freedesktop.**org/icon-theme-spec/icon-** theme-spec-latest.htmlhttp://standards.freedesktop.org/icon-theme-spec/icon-theme-spec-latest.html
______________________________**_________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.geany.org https://lists.geany.org/cgi-**bin/mailman/listinfo/usershttps://lists.geany.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
On 12-10-14 12:59 AM, Lex Trotman wrote:
On 14 October 2012 18:30, Matthew Brush mbrush@codebrainz.ca wrote:
On 12-10-14 12:05 AM, Lex Trotman wrote:
Hi All,
Geany has in the past specified a fixed image, (the jewel encrusted teapot), as the icon to use for its top level window.
There has been a request for Geany to follow the icon set by the theme. This has been committed.
However one of the icons provided by some themes has caused some consternation.
So an option to continue to use the Geany icon instead of the theme has also been committed.
This mail is to get users preference for the default setting, use the Geany icon or use the theme icon (with the Geany one as a fallback if the theme has none).
I think the default should be to follow the standard[1]:
"Icons and themes are looked for in a set of directories. By default, apps should look in $HOME/.icons (for backwards compatibility), in $XDG_DATA_DIRS/icons and in /usr/share/pixmaps (in that order). Applications may further add their own icon directories to this list, and users may extend or change the list (in application/desktop specific ways).In each of these directories themes are stored as subdirectories. A theme can be spread across several base directories by having subdirectories of the same name. This way users can extend and override system themes."
And then further down:
"It is recommended that the icons installed in the hicolor theme look neutral, since it is a fallback theme that will be used in combination with some very different looking themes. But if you don't have any neutral icon, please install whatever icon you have in the hicolor theme so that all applications get at least some icon in all themes."
And in another place:
"The lookup inside a theme is done in three phases. First all the directories are scanned for an exact match, e.g. one where the allowed size of the icon files match what was looked up. Then all the directories are scanned for any icon that matches the name. If that fails we finally fall back on unthemed icons. If we fail to find any icon at all it is up to the application to pick a good fallback, as the correct choice depends on the context."
So we should not, according to my interpretation, override the user's chosen icon theme icons and our own installed fallback hicolor icon with the hardcoded/inline/embedded icon unless no other icon can be found.
That does not say that the user should *not* be able to choose to override the theme. That is another explicit user choice.
No it doesn't say they shouldn't be able to choose to override the theme, it says how the user is *supposed to be able* to do it. The explicit choice of icons the user makes is not Geany's problem. If the user overrides the default icon Geany provides in the default icon theme (hicolor), that is their explicit choice.
Users can always change the setting at any time, this is only what should
be the default.
IMO, the setting is redundant because you can use the DE/GTK icon theme mechanisms to change what icon is use
The DE/GTK mechanism is complex, varies and needs to be applied to each theme, this is simple. For the few lines the setting requires, it seems silly to question having a setting that can make both groups of users happy, hence the question is only what the default choice should be.
The DE/GTK mechanism is not complex: if you don't want to override Geany's icon, don't override it with your own icon[1].
Cheers, Matthew Brush
[1] In your case the choice to override the default icon was made by your distro, but it's still explicitly overriding the default.
Am 14.10.2012 09:05, schrieb Lex Trotman:
Hi All,
Geany has in the past specified a fixed image, (the jewel encrusted teapot), as the icon to use for its top level window.
There has been a request for Geany to follow the icon set by the theme. This has been committed.
I'm very curious that application icons be themed at all. IMO the icon belongs to the application and is part of its identity, and not some theme. This is also why Linux Mint makes me mad because of its icons for various applications including Geany.
(I always switch the icon theme to a less intrusive one [GNOME-Wise which resembles the Mint-y look a bit] on a fresh Mint installation).
Best regards.
On 12-10-14 01:50 AM, Thomas Martitz wrote:
Am 14.10.2012 09:05, schrieb Lex Trotman:
Hi All,
Geany has in the past specified a fixed image, (the jewel encrusted teapot), as the icon to use for its top level window.
There has been a request for Geany to follow the icon set by the theme. This has been committed.
I'm very curious that application icons be themed at all. IMO the icon belongs to the application and is part of its identity, and not some theme. This is also why Linux Mint makes me mad because of its icons for various applications including Geany.
(I always switch the icon theme to a less intrusive one [GNOME-Wise which resembles the Mint-y look a bit] on a fresh Mint installation).
At least on Linux, this ability to customize things seems to be prized/praised by many. So much so that "they" got together and created a standard for toolkits and DEs to follow to make it simple for the user to do, to globally change the icon theme instead of digging through app-specific preferences, if provided, to change only the window title bar icon while other icons provided by the same app follow the theme properly.
Cheers, Matthew Brush
Am 14.10.2012 12:00, schrieb Matthew Brush:
On 12-10-14 01:50 AM, Thomas Martitz wrote:
Am 14.10.2012 09:05, schrieb Lex Trotman:
Hi All,
Geany has in the past specified a fixed image, (the jewel encrusted teapot), as the icon to use for its top level window.
There has been a request for Geany to follow the icon set by the theme. This has been committed.
I'm very curious that application icons be themed at all. IMO the icon belongs to the application and is part of its identity, and not some theme. This is also why Linux Mint makes me mad because of its icons for various applications including Geany.
(I always switch the icon theme to a less intrusive one [GNOME-Wise which resembles the Mint-y look a bit] on a fresh Mint installation).
At least on Linux, this ability to customize things seems to be prized/praised by many. So much so that "they" got together and created a standard for toolkits and DEs to follow to make it simple for the user to do, to globally change the icon theme instead of digging through app-specific preferences, if provided, to change only the window title bar icon while other icons provided by the same app follow the theme properly.
I also praise this ability and I love to change icon themes. But application icons are an exception. They are, like the name, chosen by the authors and identify the application (thus part of its identity). Clearly I don't talk about icons for folders or eject-usbstick buttons which are completely fine.
Yes, I'm aware that some icon themes even change app-specific icons, that that goes too far IMO. Others share this view, see [1]. Mozilla's trademark is another example.
Best regards.
On 12-10-14 03:09 AM, Thomas Martitz wrote:
Am 14.10.2012 12:00, schrieb Matthew Brush:
On 12-10-14 01:50 AM, Thomas Martitz wrote:
Am 14.10.2012 09:05, schrieb Lex Trotman:
Hi All,
Geany has in the past specified a fixed image, (the jewel encrusted teapot), as the icon to use for its top level window.
There has been a request for Geany to follow the icon set by the theme. This has been committed.
I'm very curious that application icons be themed at all. IMO the icon belongs to the application and is part of its identity, and not some theme. This is also why Linux Mint makes me mad because of its icons for various applications including Geany.
(I always switch the icon theme to a less intrusive one [GNOME-Wise which resembles the Mint-y look a bit] on a fresh Mint installation).
At least on Linux, this ability to customize things seems to be prized/praised by many. So much so that "they" got together and created a standard for toolkits and DEs to follow to make it simple for the user to do, to globally change the icon theme instead of digging through app-specific preferences, if provided, to change only the window title bar icon while other icons provided by the same app follow the theme properly.
I also praise this ability and I love to change icon themes. But application icons are an exception. They are, like the name, chosen by the authors and identify the application (thus part of its identity). Clearly I don't talk about icons for folders or eject-usbstick buttons which are completely fine.
What about the Terminal application as an example. I like that icon to follow my theme. Should not the Calculator application use your icon theme's icon for the calculator app? Sometimes I even use the theme's "text editor" icon for Geany since it's my main text editor.
Yes, I'm aware that some icon themes even change app-specific icons, that that goes too far IMO. Others share this view, see [1]. Mozilla's trademark is another example.
I still think as a user I should be able make my Firefox icon use the Web Browser icon from my theme. If Mozilla has some trademarks, that's fine, their app should either be shipped with their default icon or should be renamed and rebranded, but to disallow (by default) the user to choose to change it on their own computer, goes to far, IMO.
Cheers, Matthew Brush
On 14 October 2012 19:50, Thomas Martitz < thomas.martitz@student.htw-berlin.de> wrote:
Am 14.10.2012 09:05, schrieb Lex Trotman:
Hi All,
Geany has in the past specified a fixed image, (the jewel encrusted teapot), as the icon to use for its top level window.
There has been a request for Geany to follow the icon set by the theme. This has been committed.
I'm very curious that application icons be themed at all. IMO the icon belongs to the application and is part of its identity, and not some theme. This is also why Linux Mint makes me mad because of its icons for various applications including Geany.
(I always switch the icon theme to a less intrusive one [GNOME-Wise which resembles the Mint-y look a bit] on a fresh Mint installation).
Yes, why do theme developers feel that it is a benefit to users to keep changing the application icon in each theme. The icon is intended to identify the application, changing it removes that identification that the user is used to between the icon and the application and devalues the brand value of the project. There are many things that can be done but normally should not be done, and this is one of them.
Cheers Lex
PS did you have a choice for the default or are you abstaining?
Best regards.
______________________________**_________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.geany.org https://lists.geany.org/cgi-**bin/mailman/listinfo/usershttps://lists.geany.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
On 12-10-14 03:11 AM, Lex Trotman wrote:
On 14 October 2012 19:50, Thomas Martitz < thomas.martitz@student.htw-berlin.de> wrote:
Am 14.10.2012 09:05, schrieb Lex Trotman:
Hi All,
Geany has in the past specified a fixed image, (the jewel encrusted teapot), as the icon to use for its top level window.
There has been a request for Geany to follow the icon set by the theme. This has been committed.
I'm very curious that application icons be themed at all. IMO the icon belongs to the application and is part of its identity, and not some theme. This is also why Linux Mint makes me mad because of its icons for various applications including Geany.
(I always switch the icon theme to a less intrusive one [GNOME-Wise which resembles the Mint-y look a bit] on a fresh Mint installation).
Yes, why do theme developers feel that it is a benefit to users to keep changing the application icon in each theme. The icon is intended to identify the application, changing it removes that identification that the user is used to between the icon and the application and devalues the brand value of the project. There are many things that can be done but normally should not be done, and this is one of them.
IMO, it depends. If it's done properly, it can be made to match the other icons in the theme and still maintain the "identity" of the application. For example if all the icons were in a blue square with rounded corners, then it makes sense for Geany's icon to be the yellow lamp with red jewels in a blue square with rounded corners to match the theme. It doesn't make sense to make it an Arabic word that a huge portion of users won't be able to read and otherwise has no "identity" of Geany.
Cheers, Matthew Brush
On 14 October 2012 21:23, Matthew Brush mbrush@codebrainz.ca wrote:
On 12-10-14 03:11 AM, Lex Trotman wrote:
On 14 October 2012 19:50, Thomas Martitz < thomas.martitz@student.htw-**berlin.dethomas.martitz@student.htw-berlin.de> wrote:
Am 14.10.2012 09:05, schrieb Lex Trotman:
Hi All,
Geany has in the past specified a fixed image, (the jewel encrusted teapot), as the icon to use for its top level window.
There has been a request for Geany to follow the icon set by the theme. This has been committed.
I'm very curious that application icons be themed at all. IMO the icon
belongs to the application and is part of its identity, and not some theme. This is also why Linux Mint makes me mad because of its icons for various applications including Geany.
(I always switch the icon theme to a less intrusive one [GNOME-Wise which resembles the Mint-y look a bit] on a fresh Mint installation).
Yes, why do theme developers feel that it is a benefit to users to keep changing the application icon in each theme. The icon is intended to identify the application, changing it removes that identification that the user is used to between the icon and the application and devalues the brand value of the project. There are many things that can be done but normally should not be done, and this is one of them.
IMO, it depends. If it's done properly, it can be made to match the other icons in the theme and still maintain the "identity" of the application. For example if all the icons were in a blue square with rounded corners, then it makes sense for Geany's icon to be the yellow lamp with red jewels in a blue square with rounded corners to match the theme. It doesn't make sense to make it an Arabic word that a huge portion of users won't be able to read and otherwise has no "identity" of Geany.
Yes, you are right it *can*, but in the case of the Faenza icon it hasn't been, and there was another one someone had invented for Geany that I encountered on my recent perusal of other distros and DEs.
From your previous:
The DE/GTK mechanism is not complex: if you don't want to override
Geany's icon, don't override it with your own icon[1].
[1] In your case the choice to override the default icon was made by your
distro, but it's still explicitly overriding the default.
Thats the point it is not my icon choice, I am stuck with the whole theme or nothing unless I start playing with the complexities.
As I said before, I don't care which way the default is set, to use the theme or to use Geanys icon, so long as there is a simple way of "fixing" the Geany icon. Lets see what others say.
Cheers Lex
Cheers, Matthew Brush
______________________________**_________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.geany.org https://lists.geany.org/cgi-**bin/mailman/listinfo/usershttps://lists.geany.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
My take on this, as a Windows user, is that applications which are not part of the operating system ought to default to their own icon. I don't know if this is the Linux sensibility, but at least one advantage of doing this would be that Geany defaults to the same thing on both Windows and Linux. Personally, I think third-party apps should have their own brand, whose default is chosen by their creators. If their creators would like to blend in with the OS by default, then that should be their choice. If they would like it to be the user's responsibility to make the app blend in, then that should be fine as well.
So my vote is, use Geany's own icon by default. Linux users who like everything to blend in should know the ways to make it happen for themselves.
John
On 12-10-14 08:05 AM, John Yeung wrote:
My take on this, as a Windows user, is that applications which are not part of the operating system ought to default to their own icon. I don't know if this is the Linux sensibility, but at least one advantage of doing this would be that Geany defaults to the same thing on both Windows and Linux. Personally, I think third-party apps should have their own brand, whose default is chosen by their creators. If their creators would like to blend in with the OS by default, then that should be their choice. If they would like it to be the user's responsibility to make the app blend in, then that should be fine as well.
So my vote is, use Geany's own icon by default. Linux users who like everything to blend in should know the ways to make it happen for themselves.
So your vote is to keep the setting off by default, so that the default icon shipped with Geany is used by default and users can then customize it the way they know how (using the standard way)?
Cheers, Matthew Brush
On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Matthew Brush mbrush@codebrainz.ca wrote:
On 12-10-14 08:05 AM, John Yeung wrote:
So my vote is, use Geany's own icon by default. Linux users who like everything to blend in should know the ways to make it happen for themselves.
So your vote is to keep the setting off by default, so that the default icon shipped with Geany is used by default and users can then customize it the way they know how (using the standard way)?
I'm afraid I don't understand well enough to say for sure. What I was trying to get across was an idea that maybe doesn't apply at all to Linux, or works very differently than what I had imagined.
Let me back up one second and say that I know what is being discussed in this thread will not have any noticeable effect for Windows.
I was trying to express an idea that doesn't really take into account how things are done in Linux. Maybe my idea meaningless or even incomprehensible for Linux.
I have to admit I keep forgetting that the different Linux distributions can be very different. I keep underestimating the role played by the distributor. When you buy a Windows machine, it is possible for HP or Sony or ASUS or whoever to include some relatively minor "post-Microsoft" customizations, and to include some non-Microsoft software. But it's pretty easy for the Windows end-user to ignore all that, and I think most of us do. So my mental model of third-party app settings is just an interaction between the app creator and the end-user.
My previous post was coming from that model. I had the notion that "out of the box" (which means downloaded from Geany's official site), Geany's icon should be whichever one the Geany creators chose to include with Geany, and the end-user should be able to override this.
I don't know if that has any sensible translation to Linux. I don't know if the Linux way to think about it is that the distro (or some piece of software that manages other software or the GUI, yet might not be part of the OS) can be a proxy for the end-user. So if the distro (or managing software) is "opinionated" about how Geany should look, there's not a good place in my mental model for that.
John
Le 14/10/2012 17:05, John Yeung a écrit :
My take on this, as a Windows user, is that applications which are not part of the operating system ought to default to their own icon. I don't know if this is the Linux sensibility, but at least one advantage of doing this would be that Geany defaults to the same thing on both Windows and Linux. Personally, I think third-party apps should have their own brand, whose default is chosen by their creators. If their creators would like to blend in with the OS by default, then that should be their choice. If they would like it to be the user's responsibility to make the app blend in, then that should be fine as well.
Well, using the system's theme icon falls in "blending with the OS", at least from a "Linux" point of view. Under GNU/Linux (and generally any communitarian/open OS) there's no real "correct look"; each distribution choose its look -- it's their responsibility to make apps looks like they want if they distribute this app.
With Windows or MacOS, it's more like the OS chooses the look (even though at least Windows is somewhat themable), and anyway those OS probably won't ever distribute Geany by themselves; so in those cases the app authors may like to provide a different icon to better blend.
Finally, note that unless the user's theme *overrides* our icon, we always will display our icon. So this shouldn't change anything on Windows or MacOS unless the user explicitly wants it (since none of them have icons for Geany).
So my vote is, use Geany's own icon by default. Linux users who like everything to blend in should know the ways to make it happen for themselves.
John _______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.geany.org https://lists.geany.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
On 12-10-14 03:45 AM, Lex Trotman wrote:
On 14 October 2012 21:23, Matthew Brush mbrush@codebrainz.ca wrote:
On 12-10-14 03:11 AM, Lex Trotman wrote:
On 14 October 2012 19:50, Thomas Martitz < thomas.martitz@student.htw-**berlin.dethomas.martitz@student.htw-berlin.de> wrote:
Am 14.10.2012 09:05, schrieb Lex Trotman:
Hi All,
Geany has in the past specified a fixed image, (the jewel encrusted teapot), as the icon to use for its top level window.
There has been a request for Geany to follow the icon set by the theme. This has been committed.
I'm very curious that application icons be themed at all. IMO the icon
belongs to the application and is part of its identity, and not some theme. This is also why Linux Mint makes me mad because of its icons for various applications including Geany.
(I always switch the icon theme to a less intrusive one [GNOME-Wise which resembles the Mint-y look a bit] on a fresh Mint installation).
Yes, why do theme developers feel that it is a benefit to users to keep changing the application icon in each theme. The icon is intended to identify the application, changing it removes that identification that the user is used to between the icon and the application and devalues the brand value of the project. There are many things that can be done but normally should not be done, and this is one of them.
IMO, it depends. If it's done properly, it can be made to match the other icons in the theme and still maintain the "identity" of the application. For example if all the icons were in a blue square with rounded corners, then it makes sense for Geany's icon to be the yellow lamp with red jewels in a blue square with rounded corners to match the theme. It doesn't make sense to make it an Arabic word that a huge portion of users won't be able to read and otherwise has no "identity" of Geany.
Yes, you are right it *can*, but in the case of the Faenza icon it hasn't been, and there was another one someone had invented for Geany that I encountered on my recent perusal of other distros and DEs.
From your previous:
The DE/GTK mechanism is not complex: if you don't want to override
Geany's icon, don't override it with your own icon[1].
[1] In your case the choice to override the default icon was made by your
distro, but it's still explicitly overriding the default.
Thats the point it is not my icon choice, I am stuck with the whole theme or nothing unless I start playing with the complexities.
The "complexities" are some imagined thing you cooked up in your head instead of learning how icon theming works in Linux. It's far more complex for a user to have to find a hidden application-specific setting to make it well behaved, than it is for you to tweak or change your current icon theme.
As I said before, I don't care which way the default is set, to use the theme or to use Geanys icon, so long as there is a simple way of "fixing" the Geany icon. Lets see what others say.
It should default to FALSE/OFF at least. I also think it's a bad reason for a setting because it's not at all Geany's problem to solve, but whatever, we already have 42M other hidden settings most people won't use, one more won't hurt much.
Cheers, Matthew Brush
Le 14/10/2012 21:51, Matthew Brush a écrit :
On 12-10-14 03:45 AM, Lex Trotman wrote:
[...]
Thats the point it is not my icon choice, I am stuck with the whole theme or nothing unless I start playing with the complexities.
The "complexities" are some imagined thing you cooked up in your head instead of learning how icon theming works in Linux. It's far more complex for a user to have to find a hidden application-specific setting to make it well behaved, than it is for you to tweak or change your current icon theme.
Yep. And even if you don't know how theme works, you could simply do
$ find /where/is/Faenza -name 'geany*' | while read f; do mv "$f" "${f%/*}/xxx-${f##*/}"; done
And be happy :)
As I said before, I don't care which way the default is set, to use the theme or to use Geanys icon, so long as there is a simple way of "fixing" the Geany icon. Lets see what others say.
It should default to FALSE/OFF at least. I also think it's a bad reason for a setting because it's not at all Geany's problem to solve, but whatever, we already have 42M other hidden settings most people won't use, one more won't hurt much.
Cheers, Matthew Brush
On 12-10-14 12:05 AM, Lex Trotman wrote:
Hi All,
Geany has in the past specified a fixed image, (the jewel encrusted teapot), as the icon to use for its top level window.
There has been a request for Geany to follow the icon set by the theme. This has been committed.
However one of the icons provided by some themes has caused some consternation.
So an option to continue to use the Geany icon instead of the theme has also been committed.
This mail is to get users preference for the default setting, use the Geany icon or use the theme icon (with the Geany one as a fallback if the theme has none).
Users can always change the setting at any time, this is only what should be the default.
Just to add to my previous quoting of "the standard" here's a blurb from the GTK+ docs[1]:
"GtkIconTheme provides a facility for looking up icons by name and size. The main reason for using a name rather than simply providing a filename is to allow different icons to be used depending on what icon theme is selected by the user. The operation of icon themes on Linux and Unix follows the Icon Theme Specification. There is a default icon theme, named hicolor where applications should install their icons, but more additional application themes can be installed as operating system vendors and users choose."
Which again, according to my interpretation, means The Right Thing is to just ship the default hicolor icon and allow the user to override that (without digging into application-specific hidden settings to enable it to work The Right Way first).
Cheers, Matthew Brush
Le 14/10/2012 09:05, Lex Trotman a écrit :
Hi All,
Hey,
Geany has in the past specified a fixed image, (the jewel encrusted teapot), as the icon to use for its top level window.
There has been a request for Geany to follow the icon set by the theme. This has been committed.
Incomplete BTW, only the main window had it changed, and the icon was looked up manually -- but implementation is another topic I'll discuss on the devel list.
However one of the icons provided by some themes has caused some consternation.
The Faenza theme (which looks like much loved since people use it more en more, and even distros uses it by default) did something very questionable: changing the visual identity of the Geany icon. That's NOT our problem. We don't have anything to do with Faenza.
BTW, the Faenza theme changes lots of application's icons for them to fit with it (e.g. square icons). That was greatly done for many apps, including -- but not limited to ;) -- Iceweasel, Icedove, GEdit, Rhythmbox, Empathy, Chromium, Blender, LibreOffice, Abiword, Nautilus and Inkscape; and poorly for some others, including Geany and Gimp.
I bet you don't complain about Faenza icons for Rhythmbox or GEdit. The problem here is only that the Faenza authors choose to change completely the look of the icon loosing the visual identity of the original icon. If they had kept the yellow lamp with the rubies, everybody would've been happy and we wouldn't have this loooooooong thread. 15 mails in less than a day is not that common :)
So an option to continue to use the Geany icon instead of the theme has also been committed.
I'm 100% with Matthew: that's a really bad idea. Adding a setting to "fix" a theme? Please, no. If we go down this road, we'll end up having 3k options to workaround various themes "issues" and alike, which will make actually theming Geany impossible. See: if I wanted my themed to use a slightly different icon, what would I need to do? I couldn't simply change/add a themed Geany icon, I'd need to also change a setting in Geany -- setting I may not know about.
Again, it's not our problem. We provide an icon, our icon, and some crazy people found it a good idea to change it radically in their theme. That's not our problem. That's the theme's author problem, and that's the problem of the distros using that theme by default. Definitely not our own.
Finally, we definitely should follow the theme's icon because it's the one used in the menus; and we can't (and shouldn't) change that. If people don't like their theme's icon, they probably also want to have it changed in the menus/launchers/application list/etc; so they need to change it in the theme anyway.
So, IM(not H at all)O, we should drop the setting and simply use the theme's icon. We install our icon in the theme, people do what they want with their ability to override it. If they do it correctly, everybody will be happy. If they do it badly, people should blame those people.
Regards, Colomban
This mail is to get users preference for the default setting, use the Geany icon or use the theme icon (with the Geany one as a fallback if the theme has none).
Users can always change the setting at any time, this is only what should be the default.
Cheers Lex