Allow changing of the top panel's colour and transparency levels without need to install extension - feature request

[Wise Melon]

Currently if one wants to change the colour or transparency levels of the top panel they have to install an extension, I think that this functionality should be built-in so that one can just change these settings in the gnome-control-center rather than having to install some third-party extension.

I am running Ubuntu GNOME 15.10 with GNOME 3.18.

[Launchpad Janitor (janitor)]

Status changed to 'Confirmed' because the bug affects multiple users.

[Dave Stroud (bigdavesr)]

This has been a problem since the start of gnome 3. For some reason I can no longer get elegance color to work in 1510 I am sure that some people like a black panel,but I dont.

[Wise Melon (wise-melon-deactivatedaccount)]

I have now also filed a report on this issue upstream: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=761250

[James Lewis (james-fsck)]

This issue, whether you call it a wishlist item, or not... makes system tray icons invisible in 17.10... surely invisible icons is a bug, not a wish?

[Daniel van Vugt (vanvugt)]

Wishlist was correct back in May since the panel was always black back then.

Yes, I agree the importance is now higher due to problems with the new transparent panel.

[Wise Melon (wise-melon-deactivatedaccount)]

@James, No, you misunderstand what I mean, I just mean the black, not all the icons and everything:

[Dave Stroud (bigdavesr)]

There is a gnome extension now that will fix this as far as to top main panel.Its called Activities configuator.maybe the wish list could be changed to have it installed by default.

[Wise Melon (wise-melon-deactivatedaccount)]

@Dave, Yes, I know, that's the one I'm referring to in my bug description (in fact it's quite obvious from the title of the bug). I meant that I was requesting for this functionality to be built-in rather than having to install the extension. Anyway, this bug is almost 2-years-old, and I'm on Arch now so you Ubuntu can do what you want with it. But it should be noted that there has been a little upstream activity on the bug so maybe this will get implemented in at least a similar way to the way I requested.