Re: Plan to fix icons [was: Re: breakage caused by removed icons from gnome-icon-theme]

On 2/6/06, Jeff Waugh <[email protected]> wrote:
> <quote who="Federico Mena Quintero">
> > On Mon, 2006-02-06 at 13:36 -0600, Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
> >
> > > 6. Create a subpackage of symlinks from the missing icons (the old icon
> > > names) to the new icons.  If you don't have a new icon that matches,
> > > find the closest generic one, or simply put in the old icon image with a
> > > marker to indicate that it needs to be replaced.  See this nice
> > > technique:  http://blogs.msdn.com/jensenh/archive/2006/01/10/511202.aspx
> >
> > To clarify this:  the point above is to make it easy to find cases where
> > we *do* have an old-style icon name and image, *and* a way to map it to
> > a new-style name, but we *don't* have a Tango-ified image to go with the
> > name.
>
> Dude, why are we supporting this *wholly inappropriate* late breakage? This
> is not the kind of change that we should meekly accept at this stage of the
> release process. We don't *have* to do this, and we *shouldn't* do it. This
> is a choice between release discipline and riding a train wreck.

I don't believe this is a fair representation.  Rodney made the change
mid-January, and released it in the gnome-icon-themes-2.13.5 tarball. 
He also notified desktop-devel-list, at
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2006-January/msg00302.html.
 Now, he did miss feature freeze by about a day, so if this is
considered a new feature then sure it was late (though just barely). 
I had thought it was just a UI change, which he beat the deadline for
by a few weeks.