On Monday, 26. May 2008, James Richard Tyrer wrote:
> Jakob Petsovits wrote:
> > b) The original, "unthemed" icons "zoom-in", "zoom-out" and
> > "zoom-original".
>
> I have no idea what you mean.  The "unthemed" icons are HiColor and KDE
> refuses to provide HiColor icons.  So, there are no "unthemed" icons to
> fallback to.

"unthemed" as in "default Oxygen icons" as opposed to "the icons of the
3rd party theme that the user has selected".

> > Let me tell you clearly that (a) is unacceptable for me, and will
> > happen over my suspended SVN account. If kdeartwork efforts are going
> >  to stall because you can't live with my decision, then so be it. If
> >  you manage to work productively with the artists and coders in my
> > place and push me from my oh so high throne as naming coordinator,
> > then so be it.
>
> OK, then do you job.  Coordinator does not mean making arbitrary
> decisions.  Actually, I must ask: who gave you this job?

I would assume that the old open source motto "who does the work decides" 
applies. I implemented fallbacks in KIconLoader, researched in lots of places 
how other people name their icons, asked in #tango for advice on various 
naming issues that I encountered, and together with Pino Toscano renamed the 
majority of KDE icons to something that works and is compatible to the naming 
spec in effect and vision.

As of my knowledge, the artists team trusts me on naming matters, and I got
"this job" because there were no disagreements, or disagreements that could be 
solved satisfactory for all people involved. That is obviously not the case 
this time, so yeah, if you insist on your opinion as I insist on mine in this 
case then we need a referee.

Also, this decision is not arbitrary. I listed good reasons why we should not 
have a "zoom" icon, and the fact that you don't agree with those still does 
not make them arbitrary.

> Obviously, 
> there are two possibilities:
>
> 1.	We are peers and my ideas should be held equally with yours.

Equally, yes. But that does also not mean that you can force your will by 
mailing your same arguments again and again. We clearly disagree and I don't 
believe that we can get any further with arguments because both our positions 
are clear. So,

a) Let someone else decide on this issue after having read this thread.
b) Let someone else decide on me being the official icon naming maintainer.

Who should decide on stuff like this? No idea really. I'm quite sure that from 
the current KDE developers, I've been involved most with the naming spec and 
surrounding documents and people, so there's no clear authority in KDE that 
we could refer to on this issue.

I propose to ask dobey (as naming spec maintainer) for the "official" stance 
on "zoom" vs. "page-zoom", and when that's resolved, let other KDE devs with 
good knowledge of icon naming (Pino Toscano, Jonathan Riddell, Danny 
Allen ...) decide on how to resolve conflicts like this the next time.

> 2.	We have hierarchal management and I I need to talk to your
> 	immediate supervisor about this.

As far as I know KDE procedures, each module in the KDE SVN has a module 
maintainer who is entitled to decide on conflicts like this. According to 
http://techbase.kde.org/Projects/Release_Team#Coordinator_List this would be 
Oliver Goffart for kdebase/runtime, where KDE core icons belong to.

We should refer to him (and possibly kde-core-devel, as you already pissed off 
most people on kde-artists) in order to resolve this issue.

Please do me a favor and just link to this thread instead of explaining 
everything from scratch if you contact any "immediate supervisor".

Regards,
  Jakob
______________________________________________________________________________
kde-artists@kde.org |  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-artists