should include Bazaar icon in installation

Bug #245602 reported by Vincent Geddes on 2008-07-04
4
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Bazaar
Wishlist
Unassigned

Bug Description

Hi,

If the bazaar icon was included in a bzr installation, then third-party plugins could use it to provide nice window manager icons. For example, right now the GtkWindows created by the bzr-gtk plugin use the default (and ugly) metacity icon. And the icon for Olive doesn't help as it's an icon of an unripe olive (which does not create a consistent brand for bzr at all).

The other option is to just include the bazaar icon in the plugins, but I think that is suboptimal.

There is a *.ico icon in the bazaar package, but that is not really unix-friendly (should also include a *.png).

bzr 1.5

Vincent Geddes (vgeddes) wrote :

To add,

On the GNOME side of things, bzr could provide 3 sizes of icons (16x16, 22x22, and 48x48), which can each be used for different use cases. these icons could be installed in the gnome/kde icon theme

Can I create a patch?

Am Freitag, den 04.07.2008, 17:26 +0000 schrieb Vincent Geddes:
> To add,
>
> On the GNOME side of things, bzr could provide 3 sizes of icons (16x16,
> 22x22, and 48x48), which can each be used for different use cases. these
> icons could be installed in the gnome/kde icon theme
>
> Can I create a patch?
We already include png versions of the Bazaar logo with bzr-gtk so at
 least for bzr-gtk there is no particular reason to ship those icons.

Cheers,

Jelmer
--
Jelmer Vernooij <email address hidden> - http://samba.org/~jelmer/
Jabber: <email address hidden>

Vincent Ladeuil (vila) wrote :

I think bzr-1.7 will provide a '.ico' with sizes (64x64, 48x48, 32x32 and 16x16, 8bit color), we may want to include the '.png' used for it.

Changed in bzr:
importance: Undecided → Wishlist
milestone: none → 1.7
status: New → Confirmed
Mark Hammond (mhammond) wrote :

FWIW, I recently contributed a newer icon, but AFAIK there have been no patches that would cause this icon to be installed in the "python installer" version, or in the "windows stand-alone binary installer", although the latter has the .ico embedded in the final executables where it can generally be used OK.

Toshio Kuratomi (toshio) wrote :

This came up in the Fedora packages this week since someone is packaging bzr-explorer and, like Vincent Geddes, thinks that it's better to have one canonical icon for bzr rather than each of bzr-gtk, qbzr, bzr-explorer, etc having their own that can get out of sync if better versions of the icon are produced.

For now, I've agreed to copy the 64x64 icon from bzr-gtk into the bzr package we ship under /usr/share/pixmaps/bzr.png. Could bzr do this in the upstream packaging? If not, is there a reason not to (I will revert if so).

Alexander Belchenko (bialix) wrote :

I think it makes sense to add the icon to bzr sources. Can we agree on the number and sizes of those icons?

Jelmer Vernooij (jelmer) on 2017-11-09
tags: added: check-for-breezy
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers