From: Jonathan Gordon <jdgordy_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 11:57:10 -0800

2009/12/21 Paul Louden <paulthenerd_at_gmail.com>:
> Jonathan Gordon wrote:
>>
>> 1) can we get rid of the redundant settings (forground/background
>> colour, backdrop, ui viewport, etc)
>>
>
> I'd say if they're truly redundant, dump them. I've been in favour of having
> "theme" settings wholly controlled by the theme file for a while anyway. It
> does cost a little configurability (in that there's no good way on-target to
> change mono-themes to fit different color schemes on color targets) but that
> problem can be addressed with something like a simple "theme generator"
> plugin that lets you pick fore and background colors and outputs appropriate
> files.
>

the colours are embeddd in the viewport definitions, so making the
theme generator plugin might be a bit complicated... but doable

>> 2) can we come up with a workable solution to make the skin buffer
>> user configurable?
>>
>
> At the very "worst" case wouldn't this simply be an option like the current
> "max files in folder" options? Maybe something like "Max theme size" with
> human-friendly options like "small" "medium" "large" and "giant" (with
> "medium" corresponding to our current settings, small being calculated for a
> text-heavy but image-free theme, "giant" assuming a backdrop for every
> screen and twice the current image usage for each screen, and "large"
> falling somewhere between for example).
>

tiny would be text heavy but no images.. the RAM required for even a
stupidly heavy text based WPS doesnt come close to one which loads
even a single medium sized image. And the space required for text is
constant, whereas its display dependant for images. but yes, it would
act the same as the max files in folder setting.
Received on 2009-12-21