On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 11:43 +0100, David Nielsen wrote: > We have standards for quality of code, we do after all have to maintain > it. It needs to work, it needs to not introduce bugs and so on. The two > of us appear to have very little understanding for how programming and > design works. Just because you can't see a change doesn't mean it's not > important. gvfs e.g. plays an important part in making pretty much every > feature Jakub listed work the right way. > > I would recommend that you actually examine the rationale behind > something like gvfs, do some research. And please be respectful when > asking questions.. don't start out by insulting the developers by saying > what they are spending their time on is useless without understanding > what it really is. > > - David Nielsen Agreed, anyway, I would wonder what the patches behind the transparency are, so far I've seen only big words and some (awesome looking) pictures. That's not enough. And I also have some doubts as to the implementation mentioned in the blog entry about which this thread started. I think having apps to enable/disable real transparency is the wrong way. It should be enabled in the gtk + gtk theme engine + window manager combination. Adding even a single line to each application to enable transparency is IMHO dirty and leads to inconsistency throughout the desktop. Martin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Fedora-art-list mailing list Fedora-art-list@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-art-list
