Time to install the new icons

Time to install the new icons

[Richard M. Stallman]

Andrew Zhilin's papers came, so we can install his icons.
Would someone like to do that, and ack?

Time to install the new icons

[Richard Stallman]

Andrew Zhilin's papers came, so we can install his icons.
Would someone like to do that, and ack?

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Chong Yidong]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

> Andrew Zhilin's papers came, so we can install his icons.
> Would someone like to do that, and ack?

Incidentally, there are some truly hideous icons in nt/icons, which
are not referred to anywhere.  Reading the changelog, these were old
icons which are no longer in use.  Is it OK to simply delete them?

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Chong Yidong]

Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

> Andrew Zhilin's papers came, so we can install his icons.
> Would someone like to do that, and ack?

Since no one else seemed interested in doing this, I have gone ahead
and installed the new Emacs icon as the default frame bitmap icon for
X windows.  The relevant changes have been checked into src/image.c,
src/xterm.c, and src/gnu.h.  The icon itself is in src/gnu.h, as an
xpm string.

This is currently only turned on for

#if defined (HAVE_XPM) && defined (HAVE_X_WINDOWS)

The ugly old icon is still in use otherwise.  I don't know how NT
handles xpm images, so I didn't try.  Could an NT Emacs hacker help
here?

Apart from this, there are two other things that still need to be
done:

1. Install the .ico file for NT (and delete the old unused ones).

2. After the release, we have to tell the various distributions to
   switch to the new Emacs icon in their application menus (in
   /usr/share/icons or whatever).

   It will probably be convenient for this purpose, if we add the new
   icons, in .png format, to etc/ or etc/images.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Chong Yidong]

Hmm, there seems to be a small but annoying black border around the
bitmap icon.  I don't know where that's coming from.  But I can't find
any mistake in the handling of the "shape mask" pixmap properly in the
code I checked in.

Anyone have any ideas?

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com>
> Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 22:24:51 -0500
> 
> Incidentally, there are some truly hideous icons in nt/icons

Which ones are ``hideous''? pleased name them, and please explain why
you think they are hideous.  IMO, they are not exactly Picasso, but
they do the job quite fine.

> which are not referred to anywhere.  Reading the changelog, these
> were old icons which are no longer in use.  Is it OK to simply
> delete them?

I think it's wrong to delete them.  They are there so that someone who
doesn't like the default icon can modify nt/emacs.rc and rebuild to
use the new default icon.  They are also installed by "make install",
so that one could use them without rebuilding in the desktop shortcut
that launches Emacs.

It would be good to document them, though.  I will look into doing
that when I have time, unless someone beats me to it.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com>
> Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 00:59:19 -0500
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> This is currently only turned on for
> 
> #if defined (HAVE_XPM) && defined (HAVE_X_WINDOWS)
> 
> The ugly old icon is still in use otherwise.  I don't know how NT
> handles xpm images, so I didn't try.  Could an NT Emacs hacker help
> here?

If HAVE_XPM is defined, then the Windows port supports xpm.  But
that's not the problem, I think.  The real problem is that the Windows
machinery of using the icons is different; see nt/emacs.rc.

Jason, could you please comment on this?  I don't know enough about
these issues.

> 1. Install the .ico file for NT (and delete the old unused ones).

The appropriate .ico file is already installed on Windows.  I wrote in
another message why I think it's wrong to delete the others.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Romain Francoise]

Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com> writes:

> Since no one else seemed interested in doing this, I have gone ahead
> and installed the new Emacs icon as the default frame bitmap icon for
> X windows.

Starting a freshly bootstrapped Emacs now gives me the following:

(emacs:10833): Gdk-WARNING **: gdkpixbuf-drawable.c:1249: Source drawable has no colormap; either pass in a colormap, or set the colormap on the drawable with gdk_drawable_set_colormap()

(emacs:10833): GdkPixbuf-CRITICAL **: gdk_pixbuf_add_alpha: assertion `pixbuf != NULL' failed

(emacs:10833): GLib-GObject-CRITICAL **: g_object_unref: assertion `G_IS_OBJECT (object)' failed

(emacs:10833): GdkPixbuf-CRITICAL **: gdk_pixbuf_get_pixels: assertion `pixbuf != NULL' failed

(emacs:10833): GdkPixbuf-CRITICAL **: gdk_pixbuf_get_rowstride: assertion `pixbuf != NULL' failed
Fatal error (11)
zsh: segmentation fault (core dumped)  ./src/emacs -q

> The relevant changes have been checked into src/image.c, src/xterm.c,
> and src/gnu.h.  The icon itself is in src/gnu.h, as an xpm string.

Why is this new icon still called `gnu'?  Unlike the old icon, it does
not represent a gnu...

> 2. After the release, we have to tell the various distributions to
>    switch to the new Emacs icon in their application menus (in
>    /usr/share/icons or whatever).

>    It will probably be convenient for this purpose, if we add the new
>    icons, in .png format, to etc/ or etc/images.

Please add it in XPM format as well.

-- 
Romain Francoise <romain@orebokech.com> | The sea! the sea! the open
it's a miracle -- http://orebokech.com/ | sea! The blue, the fresh, the
                                        | ever free! --Bryan W. Procter

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Chong Yidong]

Romain Francoise <romain@orebokech.com> writes:

> Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com> writes:
>
>> Since no one else seemed interested in doing this, I have gone ahead
>> and installed the new Emacs icon as the default frame bitmap icon for
>> X windows.
>
> Starting a freshly bootstrapped Emacs now gives me the following:
>
> (emacs:10833): Gdk-WARNING **: gdkpixbuf-drawable.c:1249: Source
> drawable has no colormap; either pass in a colormap, or set the
> colormap on the drawable with gdk_drawable_set_colormap()

Should be fixed now.  (The annoying black border I reported in an
earlier message should also be gone.)

>> The relevant changes have been checked into src/image.c, src/xterm.c,
>> and src/gnu.h.  The icon itself is in src/gnu.h, as an xpm string.
>
> Why is this new icon still called `gnu'?  Unlike the old icon, it does
> not represent a gnu...

Hmm.  Good point :-P

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Chong Yidong]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> which are not referred to anywhere.  Reading the changelog, these
>> were old icons which are no longer in use.  Is it OK to simply
>> delete them?
>
> I think it's wrong to delete them.  They are there so that someone who
> doesn't like the default icon can modify nt/emacs.rc and rebuild to
> use the new default icon.

I find it hard to imagine that anyone would prefer nt/icons/sink.ico,
or gnu7.ico, or gnu8.ico, over Andrew Zhilin's professional-looking
icon set.

Can I submit some of my own fugly .ico files to the NT icon repository
too? ;-)

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Romain Francoise]

Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com> writes:

> Should be fixed now.  (The annoying black border I reported in an
> earlier message should also be gone.)

Indeed, thanks!

-- 
Romain Francoise <romain@orebokech.com> | The sea! the sea! the open
it's a miracle -- http://orebokech.com/ | sea! The blue, the fresh, the
                                        | ever free! --Bryan W. Procter

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> From: Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com>
> Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 11:53:17 -0500
> 
> I find it hard to imagine that anyone would prefer nt/icons/sink.ico,
> or gnu7.ico, or gnu8.ico, over Andrew Zhilin's professional-looking
> icon set.

Andrew's icons were just installed, so we have no idea how many users
will prefer them.  On top of that, no one arranged for the Windows
port to use Andrew's icons; we don't even know if they work on
Windows.

Given these circumstances, it sounds unwise to delete the old icon
files.

> Can I submit some of my own fugly .ico files to the NT icon repository
> too? ;-)

We don't accept fugly icons in the nt directory.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Lennart Borgman]

Richard Stallman wrote:

>Andrew Zhilin's papers came, so we can install his icons.
>Would someone like to do that, and ack?
>  
>
Andrew, congratulations to making the icons we decided to use! Have you 
put together a w32 icon with those versions that was choosen? I have not 
seen it yet. May I suggest that you name it emacs22.ico?

Re: Time to install the new icons - colors?

[Lennart Borgman]

Richard Stallman wrote:

>Andrew Zhilin's papers came, so we can install his icons.
>Would someone like to do that, and ack?
>  
>
Andrew made some suggestions of a variant of his icon with different 
colors. Would it be good to ship the choosen icon (not the variant) in 
different colors?

At least on w32 the choice of which icon to use for files associated 
with Emacs can be done by the user rather easily.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Richard M. Stallman]

    Incidentally, there are some truly hideous icons in nt/icons, which
    are not referred to anywhere.  Reading the changelog, these were old
    icons which are no longer in use.  Is it OK to simply delete them?

Sure, once you verify they are really not in use.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Chong Yidong]

Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman.073@student.lu.se> writes:

> Andrew, congratulations to making the icons we decided to use! Have
> you put together a w32 icon with those versions that was choosen? I
> have not seen it yet. May I suggest that you name it emacs22.ico?

There is a Windows .ico file in the attachment that Andrew sent in his
17 Oct email.

  http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2005-10/msg00814.html

It should be straightforward to put the .ico file in nt/icons and
modify nt/emacs.rc to point to it.  I haven't done that because I
don't have a way to test it.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Lennart Borgman]

Chong Yidong wrote:

>Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman.073@student.lu.se> writes:
>
>  
>
>>Andrew, congratulations to making the icons we decided to use! Have
>>you put together a w32 icon with those versions that was choosen? I
>>have not seen it yet. May I suggest that you name it emacs22.ico?
>>    
>>
>
>There is a Windows .ico file in the attachment that Andrew sent in his
>17 Oct email.
>
>  http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2005-10/msg00814.html
>
>It should be straightforward to put the .ico file in nt/icons and
>modify nt/emacs.rc to point to it.  I haven't done that because I
>don't have a way to test it.
>  
>
Thanks, but I looked at that icon before writing the message. Maybe I 
should have said that.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Jason Rumney]

Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman.073@student.lu.se> writes:

> Andrew, congratulations to making the icons we decided to use! Have
> you put together a w32 icon with those versions that was choosen? I
> have not seen it yet. May I suggest that you name it emacs22.ico?

It should be emacs.ico.  The version in which the icon was introduced
is irrelevant.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Jason Rumney]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> The ugly old icon is still in use otherwise.  I don't know how NT
>> handles xpm images, so I didn't try.  Could an NT Emacs hacker help
>> here?
>
> If HAVE_XPM is defined, then the Windows port supports xpm.  But
> that's not the problem, I think.  The real problem is that the Windows
> machinery of using the icons is different; see nt/emacs.rc.

Right. We have XPM support in buffers, but the frame icon is handled
directly by Windows, so we need a .ico file for that.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Jason Rumney]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> 1. Install the .ico file for NT (and delete the old unused ones).
>
> The appropriate .ico file is already installed on Windows.  I wrote in
> another message why I think it's wrong to delete the others.

Where was it installed? My CVS update does not seem to have picked it
up.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Cc: Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com>, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> From: Jason Rumney <jasonr@gnu.org>
> Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 23:27:52 +0000
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> >> 1. Install the .ico file for NT (and delete the old unused ones).
> >
> > The appropriate .ico file is already installed on Windows.  I wrote in
> > another message why I think it's wrong to delete the others.
> 
> Where was it installed? My CVS update does not seem to have picked it
> up.

I realize now that my reply was probably a misunderstanding: I thought
``install the .ico file...'' was talking about "make install" time.
Sorry.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Miles Bader]

2005/11/17, Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com>:
> I find it hard to imagine that anyone would prefer nt/icons/sink.ico,
> or gnu7.ico, or gnu8.ico, over Andrew Zhilin's professional-looking
> icon set.

Well... I agree all the "gnu*" icons are pretty lame, but sink.ico has
a bit of nostalgia value -- it's just a colorized/shrunken version one
of the very first emacs icons (maybe _the_ first one -- I first saw it
in the 80s); I guess the original B&W version is what's in
etc/emacs.{icon,xbm}.

Since it's extremely small anyway, why not keep "sink.ico" just for that reason?

-miles
--
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.

RE: Time to install the new icons

[Drew Adams]

    sink.ico has a bit of nostalgia value...why not keep "sink.ico" just
    for that reason?

Sure, why not? You never know, perhaps everyone will prefer it - let's not
forget the saga of Classic Coke.

I'd propose keeping all of the old icons - to serve as a kind of museum -
labeling them with the Emacs version when they were introduced. As Miles
points out, their space is negligible. We might want to put all of the old
icons in a subdirectory (or sibling directory).

The main icon directory should, IMO, have multiple, current icons that are
essentially the same, with different color schemes. At least on Windows,
it's easy for users to choose the one they prefer.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Bill Wohler]

Miles Bader <snogglethorpe@gmail.com> writes:

> 2005/11/17, Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com>:
>> I find it hard to imagine that anyone would prefer nt/icons/sink.ico,
>> or gnu7.ico, or gnu8.ico, over Andrew Zhilin's professional-looking
>> icon set.
>
> Well... I agree all the "gnu*" icons are pretty lame, but sink.ico has
> a bit of nostalgia value -- it's just a colorized/shrunken version one
> of the very first emacs icons (maybe _the_ first one -- I first saw it
> in the 80s); I guess the original B&W version is what's in
> etc/emacs.{icon,xbm}.

I agree.

One question I have is why are these icons in nt/icons? It seems to me
that etc/images is a better place for emacs.ico. Rather than  litter
etc/images with the old icons, these could go in etc/images/museum or
etc/images/archives or some other reasonably named sub-directory.

I also see images in etc, msdos, etc/tree-widget, and src/bitmaps. It
would be nice if all of these were in etc/images too.

What do people think?

-- 
Bill Wohler <wohler@newt.com>  http://www.newt.com/wohler/  GnuPG ID:610BD9AD
Maintainer of comp.mail.mh FAQ and MH-E. Vote Libertarian!
If you're passed on the right, you're in the wrong lane.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Bill Wohler <wohler@newt.com>
> Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 10:01:38 -0800
> 
> One question I have is why are these icons in nt/icons? It seems to me
> that etc/images is a better place for emacs.ico. Rather than  litter
> etc/images with the old icons, these could go in etc/images/museum or
> etc/images/archives or some other reasonably named sub-directory.
> 
> I also see images in etc, msdos, etc/tree-widget, and src/bitmaps. It
> would be nice if all of these were in etc/images too.

The MS-DOS and Windows icons are in separate directories because they
are installed by "make install" in appropriate places where the system
and users look for icons if they wish to override the default icon.
Lumping these icons with all the others might produce unnecessary
confusion on those platforms.  It will also run the risk of breaking
the fragile build and installation scripts on those platforms.

Please, can we drop this subject that tries to ``fix'' that which
ain't broken?  It wastes valuable energy and time, which are better
applied to moving towards the pretest and the ensuing release.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Jason Rumney]

Bill Wohler <wohler@newt.com> writes:

> One question I have is why are these icons in nt/icons? It seems to me
> that etc/images is a better place for emacs.ico.

Are .ico files useful as images, other than as icons on MS Windows?

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Miles Bader]

2005/11/18, Jason Rumney <jasonr@gnu.org>:
> > One question I have is why are these icons in nt/icons? It seems to me
> > that etc/images is a better place for emacs.ico.
>
> Are .ico files useful as images, other than as icons on MS Windows?

Some portable image software seems to be able to handle them (e.g.,
imagemagick), but some can not (e.g., "qiv", my favorite image
viewer).

-MIles
--
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Andrew Zhilin]

--- Lennart Borgman
<lennart.borgman.073@student.lu.se> wrote:

> Andrew, congratulations to making the icons we
> decided to use! Have you 
> put together a w32 icon with those versions that was
> choosen? I have not 
> seen it yet. May I suggest that you name it
> emacs22.ico?
> 

Thank you!
Sure, I'll gladly do that, but could you, please,
specify what exact images must be included into the
.ico file? Perhaps, I have missed something, but, as I
understood, notebook-like icons were chosen for 32x32
and 48x48. As a matter of fact, there are 2 variants
of notebook-like icons (darker one and lighter one -
they look quite alike, actually :). But the main thing
is that I can not make up my mind which one was chosen
for 16x16. 

Please, give your comments on that.

WBR,
Andrew Zhilin
andrew_zhilin at yahoo dot com


	
		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 
http://mail.yahoo.com

Re: Time to install the new icons

[YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu]

>>>>> On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 16:41:13 -0800 (PST), Andrew Zhilin <andrew_zhilin@yahoo.com> said:

> Sure, I'll gladly do that, but could you, please, specify what exact
> images must be included into the .ico file? Perhaps, I have missed
> something, but, as I understood, notebook-like icons were chosen for
> 32x32 and 48x48. As a matter of fact, there are 2 variants of
> notebook-like icons (darker one and lighter one - they look quite
> alike, actually :). But the main thing is that I can not make up my
> mind which one was chosen for 16x16.

For consistency, it would be better for Mac OS X to have the same icon
with other platforms.  Could you also consider to create a 128x128
version of what is (will be?) chosen?  If possible, 16x16, 32x32,
48x48, and 128x128 versions in PNG format is preferrable.  Partial
ones of them are also OK but the 128x128 one will be strongly desired.

				     YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu
				mituharu@math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Miles Bader]

2005/11/18, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu <mituharu@math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp>:
> For consistency, it would be better for Mac OS X to have the same icon
> with other platforms.  Could you also consider to create a 128x128
> version of what is (will be?) chosen?  If possible, 16x16, 32x32,
> 48x48, and 128x128 versions in PNG format is preferrable.  Partial
> ones of them are also OK but the 128x128 one will be strongly desired.

Hmmm, how was the original icon drawn?  I think gnome etc. can
directly handle SVG (scalable, "vector") format icons, and that might
be preferable as a master format from which we could easily produce
the larger sizes (128x128, 48x48, 32x32(?)) in the pixel-based
formats.

-Miles
--
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Chong Yidong]

I went ahead and checked in Andrew's icons, in png format, into
etc/images/icons.  They are:

 emacs_16.png  emacs_24.png  emacs_32.png  emacs_48.png

The last two guys are the "perspective" versions of the icons.  (The
16x16 and 24x24 are too small to have a perspective icons.)

It is NOT necessary to provide .xpm or .pbm versions of these icons.
We don't link to them in Emacs itself.  They are there for
distributors, such as the GNOME and KDE projects, Redhat, Ubuntu,
etc., to put in their menus.  Presumably, these guys know how to use
Gimp or Imagemagick or whatever.

Strictly speaking, they don't even need to be in the source tree, but
it's as good a place as any to put them.

I also added a note in FOR-RELEASE: to contact the various
distributors and tell them to switch to the new icons, just before
Emacs 22 gets released.  (Although, by the time THAT happens, email
will probably have been obsoleted by the Inter-Galactic Telepathic
Transmission Network, or something...)

One last note: since we have a spiffy new icon, how about using it for
the splash screen?  Andrew, would it be possible to rescale your icon
to 250 x 200, to replace etc/splash.xpm?

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Miles Bader]

2005/11/18, Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com>:
> One last note: since we have a spiffy new icon, how about using it for
> the splash screen?  Andrew, would it be possible to rescale your icon
> to 250 x 200, to replace etc/splash.xpm?

A good icon doesn't necessarily make a good splash screen.  I think
the "notebook motif", while very nice in an icon, would look downright
weird in the splash screen.

If you look at splash screens for typical application, they are
usually very different from the application's icon; usually they seem
to combine: (1) a cool/striking random image (to get the user's
interest), (2) the application's name + version number in big letters,
(3) the application/project's logo, if it has one (often the logo is
somehow incorporated into the "cool image", e.g., a recent Gnome
splash screen has the Gnome "foot" sort of disolving like an antacid
tablet -- it does look pretty cool :-).

Of course, as Andrew did such nice icons, maybe he could make a neat
splash screen too...

-Miles
--
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Miles Bader]

2005/11/18, Miles Bader <snogglethorpe@gmail.com>:
> Of course, as Andrew did such nice icons, maybe he could make a neat
> splash screen too...

BTW, if someone can come up with modern flashy splash screen for
Emacs, I think it would impress (or shock :-) a lot of people -- Emacs
tends to have a sort of old-fashioned/fuddy-duddy image -- and perhaps
give a hint as to the amount of effort many people have put into
polishing and improving this release.

-Miles
--
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[David Kastrup]

Miles Bader <snogglethorpe@gmail.com> writes:

> 2005/11/18, Miles Bader <snogglethorpe@gmail.com>:
>> Of course, as Andrew did such nice icons, maybe he could make a neat
>> splash screen too...
>
> BTW, if someone can come up with modern flashy splash screen for
> Emacs, I think it would impress (or shock :-) a lot of people -- Emacs
> tends to have a sort of old-fashioned/fuddy-duddy image -- and perhaps
> give a hint as to the amount of effort many people have put into
> polishing and improving this release.

How about a GNU head chewing up a notebook?

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Miles Bader]

2005/11/18, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>:
> How about a GNU head chewing up a notebook?

I guess the mushrooms would provide some bold and striking color for
the image...

-miles
--
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Chong Yidong]

Miles Bader <snogglethorpe@gmail.com> writes:

> A good icon doesn't necessarily make a good splash screen.  I think
> the "notebook motif", while very nice in an icon, would look downright
> weird in the splash screen.

Oh, it's not so bad.  I put together a proof-of-concept at 

http://web.mit.edu/cyd/www/

There are also a couple of other possibilities on that page that are
worth thinking about, too.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[David Kastrup]

Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com> writes:

> Miles Bader <snogglethorpe@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> A good icon doesn't necessarily make a good splash screen.  I think
>> the "notebook motif", while very nice in an icon, would look downright
>> weird in the splash screen.
>
> Oh, it's not so bad.  I put together a proof-of-concept at 
>
> http://web.mit.edu/cyd/www/
>
> There are also a couple of other possibilities on that page that are
> worth thinking about, too.

Except for the last one, they look too fuzzy.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Re: About screen (was: Time to install the new icons)

[David Reitter]

On 18 Nov 2005, at 05:01, Chong Yidong wrote:
>
> There are also a couple of other possibilities on that page that are
> worth thinking about, too.

:-)

Also, may I note that Emacs runs sufficiently stable so that other  
menu items than "Recover Crashed Session" might be more useful. Also,  
it would be a better advertisement.
Maybe point to C-x C-f and C-x C-s, in particular since "visit" is  
already Emacs-slang.

"Files are loaded into buffers - switch between them with the Buffers  
menu."

Please ignore my naive comment if there have been discussion about  
this in the past.

RE: Time to install the new icons

[Drew Adams]

    I put together a proof-of-concept at
    http://web.mit.edu/cyd/www/
    There are also a couple of other possibilities on that page that are
    worth thinking about, too.

Please consider combining all three: our fearless leader, straddling the MSW
jolly roger as if it were a bucking mechanical cowboy-bar bronco, and waving
a pair of gnu horns wildly in his left hand, in a quixotic quest for
balance.

I think that would provoke a certain amount of reflection upon the ideas of
GNU and free software.

Oh, and place an icon-size glowing magic gnushroom in Richard's right hand,
compassing the course forward (or backward through another window, with
`C-u').

And don't leave out the kitchen sink, lassoed and dragging in the dust
behind the gnu-guru cowboy and his mustang microsteed - a legacy anchor of
releases past.

"Emacs has it all!", be our motto - or, in Deutsch, "Emacs Super Alt-S".

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Richard M. Stallman]

    Of course, as Andrew did such nice icons, maybe he could make a neat
    splash screen too...

Perhaps he could, but the one we have is fine.  I don't want to consider
changing it, because I have more important things to do, and so do you.
We will stick with the current splash screen.

I ask all of you to let this issue drop and not send any more messages
about it.  More generally, I would like people to stop posting
suggestions for changes in parts of Emacs where there is not a
_problem_.  It would be a mistake to implement any such changes now,
and discussing them now is a distraction from finishing the release.

Re: About screen (was: Time to install the new icons)

[Richard M. Stallman]

This thread should never have been started.
It would be a mistake to reopen the issue of the splash screen now,
so I will simply reject any proposals to change it.
Please don't spend time writing such proposals.

Please turn your attention to the tasks that need to be done
for the release.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 23:32:35 +0100
> From: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman.073@student.lu.se>
> Cc: Andrew Zhilin <andrew_zhilin@yahoo.com>, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> >>Andrew, congratulations to making the icons we decided to use! Have
> >>you put together a w32 icon with those versions that was choosen? I
> >>have not seen it yet. May I suggest that you name it emacs22.ico?
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >There is a Windows .ico file in the attachment that Andrew sent in his
> >17 Oct email.
> >
> >  http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2005-10/msg00814.html
> >
> >It should be straightforward to put the .ico file in nt/icons and
> >modify nt/emacs.rc to point to it.  I haven't done that because I
> >don't have a way to test it.
> >  
> >
> Thanks, but I looked at that icon before writing the message. Maybe I 
> should have said that.

So should we install the single Windows .ico file sent in the above
message as the default Emacs icon on MS-Windows?  I'm not sure we've
reached a consensus on this.  Would people who use Emacs on Windows
look at that icon and speak up their minds?

RE: Time to install the new icons

[Drew Adams]

    So should we install the single Windows .ico file sent in the above
    message as the default Emacs icon on MS-Windows?  I'm not sure we've
    reached a consensus on this.  Would people who use Emacs on Windows
    look at that icon and speak up their minds?

1. Could we please include different color-scheme versions of the (same)
icons in the Windows exe? In Windows (and perhaps on other platforms), it is
easy for users to change the icon that they associate with a program. When
they do this, they open a particular set of icon choices and choose one.
Keeping to the same design but providing several color-scheme variants would
be good.

I'm not a Windows expert, but I believe it is easier for a user to change
the icon associated with a shortcut (to an app) than the icon associated
directly with the app itself. In the case of a shortcut, you just
right-click it, choose Properties, click Change Icon..., and click the icon
you want.

If changing the icon associated directly with an app is harder for users to
do (e.g. change registry settings), then we might want to also provide
shortcuts to runemacs.exe and emacs.exe (and gnuclientw.exe, if that's
provided). It would then be enough to include the color-scheme variants of
the icons in the same folder. (We could also include older icons, in a
subfolder.)

2. You ask if we should include the single .ico file from Andrew's email.
The only .ico file in that message is a 48x48 icon. In Windows, at least, we
will need to provide additional icons of different sizes - in particular,
16x16.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Lennart Borgman]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

>So should we install the single Windows .ico file sent in the above
>message as the default Emacs icon on MS-Windows?  I'm not sure we've
>reached a consensus on this.  Would people who use Emacs on Windows
>look at that icon and speak up their minds?
>  
>
Let us some up the questions then. First the look and feel (please look 
again at the page http://ourcomments.org/Emacs/NewIcons.html at Andrew 
Zhilin's icons):

1) Which 16x16 icon should be used? There are two versions on the last 
row of Andrews contributions. I myself prefer the second of those 
because it is more close to the bigger versions, but I know others have 
offered different opinions.
2) Andrew asked if the darker or lighter variant should be used. I think 
the darker version is in the top row and the lighter in the bottom row.
3) Some people (including myself) ask for these icons in different 
colors. I know it is rather easy to handle on w32 and I guess that it is 
easy to handle on other platforms too.

Then some more technical questions (size and color depth):

A) Which different sizes do we want in the icon file for w32? I believe 
at least 16x16, 32x32 and 48x48. How about 24x24, is that commonly used?
B) What color resolutions do we want? I believe low color resolution 
(256 colors) is necessary (because scaling down the color resolution 
does not give good results sometimes). How about high resolution? Should 
that look exactly the same? Higher resolutions gives a bit more 
possibilities. Maybe you want to use that Andrew?

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>
> Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 08:13:01 -0800
> 
>     So should we install the single Windows .ico file sent in the above
>     message as the default Emacs icon on MS-Windows?  I'm not sure we've
>     reached a consensus on this.  Would people who use Emacs on Windows
>     look at that icon and speak up their minds?
> 
> 1. Could we please include different color-scheme versions of the (same)
> icons in the Windows exe?

That's a different issue.  We currently have only 2 types of icons:
for bright background and for dark background; no further color scheme
support is available.  I say let's first decide whether we want to
change the default icon, and if we do, let's after that see if we need
to provide more support for color schemes.

> I'm not a Windows expert, but I believe it is easier for a user to change
> the icon associated with a shortcut (to an app) than the icon associated
> directly with the app itself.

But we _are_ talking about an icon for a shortcut, since neither
emacs.exe nor runemacs.exe are themselves copied to the Desktop or to
the Start Menu.

> In the case of a shortcut, you just right-click it, choose
> Properties, click Change Icon..., and click the icon you want.

Did you actually try doing that with the shortcut to runemacs.exe?
When you click Properties->Change Icon for a shortcut, the list of
available shortcuts shows the ones mentioned in the emacs.rc file, not
the ones in the icons/ directory.  For the latter, you need to click
Browse and navigate to the icons/ directory (or type the directory
name directly).

> If changing the icon associated directly with an app is harder for users to
> do (e.g. change registry settings), then we might want to also provide
> shortcuts to runemacs.exe and emacs.exe (and gnuclientw.exe, if that's
> provided).

We do provide shortcuts to runemacs.exe, in the Start Menu.  That's
what "addpm /q" does in "make install".

> 2. You ask if we should include the single .ico file from Andrew's email.
> The only .ico file in that message is a 48x48 icon.

I think it's a 16x16 icon.  If you place the mouse pointer above it,
doesn't Windows tell you that?

Anyway, these are all technicalities not directly related to the
question I asked.  Do you like Andrew's icon, and would you like it to
be the default icon for Emacs on Windows (assuming that all the other
technicalities are resolved)?

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 20:14:51 +0100
> From: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman@ourcomments.org>
> CC: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman.073@student.lu.se>, 
>  andrew_zhilin@yahoo.com,  emacs-devel@gnu.org, 
>  "Richard M. Stallman" <rms@gnu.org>
> 
> 1) Which 16x16 icon should be used? There are two versions on the last 
> row of Andrews contributions. I myself prefer the second of those 
> because it is more close to the bigger versions, but I know others have 
> offered different opinions.

I was specifically asking about the only .ico file sent by Andrew.  It
looks exactly like the 16x16 .png icon we now have in etc/images/icons
directory.  Do I understand correctly that you don't like it?

> 2) Andrew asked if the darker or lighter variant should be used. I think 
> the darker version is in the top row and the lighter in the bottom row.
> 3) Some people (including myself) ask for these icons in different 
> colors. I know it is rather easy to handle on w32 and I guess that it is 
> easy to handle on other platforms too.

Let's for now settle for the same scheme as we had before: 32x32 and
48x48 for size, and for each size one icon on dark background and one
on light background.

> A) Which different sizes do we want in the icon file for w32? I believe 
> at least 16x16, 32x32 and 48x48. How about 24x24, is that commonly used?
> B) What color resolutions do we want? I believe low color resolution 
> (256 colors) is necessary (because scaling down the color resolution 
> does not give good results sometimes). How about high resolution? Should 
> that look exactly the same? Higher resolutions gives a bit more 
> possibilities. Maybe you want to use that Andrew?

Again, I'd say let's for now have the same color resolutions as we had
before.  Let's not complicate the issue by too much creeping
featurism; that will come later.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Lennart Borgman]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

>>Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 20:14:51 +0100
>>From: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman@ourcomments.org>
>>CC: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman.073@student.lu.se>, 
>> andrew_zhilin@yahoo.com,  emacs-devel@gnu.org, 
>> "Richard M. Stallman" <rms@gnu.org>
>>
>>1) Which 16x16 icon should be used? There are two versions on the last 
>>row of Andrews contributions. I myself prefer the second of those 
>>because it is more close to the bigger versions, but I know others have 
>>offered different opinions.
>>    
>>
>
>I was specifically asking about the only .ico file sent by Andrew.  It
>looks exactly like the 16x16 .png icon we now have in etc/images/icons
>directory.  Do I understand correctly that you don't like it?
>  
>
My personal opinion is not most important here. Andrew asked for our 
opinions about this: 
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2005-11/msg00974.html

And unfortunately I can not look at the png files in etc/images/icons. 
The copies I have downloaded from CVS are perhaps broken on my. I am 
using w32 and cvsnt from Oct 9 2005. Must something special be done to 
download the images on w32?

>  
>
>>2) Andrew asked if the darker or lighter variant should be used. I think 
>>the darker version is in the top row and the lighter in the bottom row.
>>3) Some people (including myself) ask for these icons in different 
>>colors. I know it is rather easy to handle on w32 and I guess that it is 
>>easy to handle on other platforms too.
>>    
>>
>
>Let's for now settle for the same scheme as we had before: 32x32 and
>48x48 for size, and for each size one icon on dark background and one
>on light background.
>  
>
I do not understand your comments about colors. Do you mean that we 
should have one version for light and another dark backgrounds? Or, do 
you say that we have that now? Maybe you misunderstood Andrew here?

I do not understand your comments about sizes either. Did you perhaps 
forget 16x16? I was just asking about 24x24 to be sure. Was that size 
perhaps needed on another platform than w32?

>>A) Which different sizes do we want in the icon file for w32? I believe 
>>at least 16x16, 32x32 and 48x48. How about 24x24, is that commonly used?
>>B) What color resolutions do we want? I believe low color resolution 
>>(256 colors) is necessary (because scaling down the color resolution 
>>does not give good results sometimes). How about high resolution? Should 
>>that look exactly the same? Higher resolutions gives a bit more 
>>possibilities. Maybe you want to use that Andrew?
>>    
>>
>
>Again, I'd say let's for now have the same color resolutions as we had
>before.  Let's not complicate the issue by too much creeping
>featurism; that will come later.
>
The icon from Andrew actually include versions for 256 colors and 32-bit 
colors (which I believe is for xp), but no 24-bit color version.

RE: Time to install the new icons

[Drew Adams]

    > 1. Could we please include different color-scheme versions of
    the (same)
    > icons in the Windows exe?

    That's a different issue.  We currently have only 2 types of icons:
    for bright background and for dark background; no further color scheme
    support is available.  I say let's first decide whether we want to
    change the default icon, and if we do, let's after that see if we need
    to provide more support for color schemes.

Yes, of course. I didn't realize the basic design was not yet decided upon.
See my other message on that question.

    > I'm not a Windows expert, but I believe it is easier for a
    user to change
    > the icon associated with a shortcut (to an app) than the icon
    associated
    > directly with the app itself.

    But we _are_ talking about an icon for a shortcut, since neither
    emacs.exe nor runemacs.exe are themselves copied to the Desktop or to
    the Start Menu.

OK, good. I didn't realize that we supplied Desktop and Start Menu
shortcuts.

    > In the case of a shortcut, you just right-click it, choose
    > Properties, click Change Icon..., and click the icon you want.

    Did you actually try doing that with the shortcut to runemacs.exe?
    When you click Properties->Change Icon for a shortcut, the list of
    available shortcuts shows the ones mentioned in the emacs.rc file, not
    the ones in the icons/ directory.  For the latter, you need to click
    Browse and navigate to the icons/ directory (or type the directory
    name directly).

I don't have the build here. But, either way is fine with me - it's OK to
browse to another location (provided you know where those icons are to be
found).

    > If changing the icon associated directly with an app is
    harder for users to
    > do (e.g. change registry settings), then we might want to also provide
    > shortcuts to runemacs.exe and emacs.exe (and gnuclientw.exe, if that's
    > provided).

    We do provide shortcuts to runemacs.exe, in the Start Menu.  That's
    what "addpm /q" does in "make install".

Got it. Good.

    > 2. You ask if we should include the single .ico file from
    Andrew's email.
    > The only .ico file in that message is a 48x48 icon.

    I think it's a 16x16 icon.  If you place the mouse pointer above it,
    doesn't Windows tell you that?

My bad. I didn't realize that all of the icons were in the .ico, and I
viewed only the 48x48 one.

    Anyway, these are all technicalities not directly related to the
    question I asked.  Do you like Andrew's icon, and would you like it to
    be the default icon for Emacs on Windows (assuming that all the other
    technicalities are resolved)?

The icons are fine with me (but see my other message, for personal
preferences, if the design is still open). There are 6 images in the .ico
file. Two are 16x16 icons, I believe, one of which has the top-bound spiral
notebook. Which of the two is the one intended as the default 16x16 image?

I personally would prefer a color that stands out a little more - this
appears to be a grayscale image, which is pretty dull. But if other color
schemes are also provided, then I don't care which color is used as the
default. I guess gray has the advantage of "going" with everything (I just
prefer that Emacs stand out a bit).

RE: Time to install the new icons

[Drew Adams]

    http://ourcomments.org/Emacs/NewIcons.html - Andrew
    Zhilin's icons):

If these icons are still open to design, then here is one more opinion,
FWIW:

I like the "cut-off" gnu horns - that is, the ones that look more like an
"E". I think that the more complete horns look too much like an "M" (and
they are less attractive, IMO). The tiny word "emacs" should be dropped,
however.

The notebook is good to have in the larger icons - and maybe also in the
smaller icon (16x16). If it is used in the 16x16 icon, then we are trying to
have it be recognized as a version of the larger-icon notebook. Especially
in that case, but even in general, I think I would prefer that the larger
notebook also be vertical, instead of laid diagonally.

I'm not sure about the use of the color gradient (vs a flat color). The
gradient makes the image slightly harder to discern. It seems to work OK for
the gray icon, but it works less well for the colored ones. Dunno - I'd like
to see it again, with the "E" horns on a vertical notebook, to see if that
works OK.

Finally, I'm not a fan of the shiny 3D button versions (2nd and 3rd in top
row).

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 22:11:42 +0100
> From: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman.073@student.lu.se>
> CC: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman@ourcomments.org>, 
>  andrew_zhilin@yahoo.com,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> My personal opinion is not most important here. Andrew asked for our 
> opinions about this: 
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2005-11/msg00974.html
> 
> And unfortunately I can not look at the png files in etc/images/icons. 

I looked at them with Emacs.

> The copies I have downloaded from CVS are perhaps broken on my. I am 
> using w32 and cvsnt from Oct 9 2005. Must something special be done to 
> download the images on w32?

I use -kb for all the files, and beyond that didn't need anything
special.  The *.png files are marked -kb anyway, so I cannot imagine
what could be the problem.

> >Let's for now settle for the same scheme as we had before: 32x32 and
> >48x48 for size, and for each size one icon on dark background and one
> >on light background.
> >  
> >
> I do not understand your comments about colors. Do you mean that we 
> should have one version for light and another dark backgrounds? Or, do 
> you say that we have that now?

Both: I say that we have now 32x32 and 48x48 icons, and each one has 2
variants, one each for dark and light background.  And I say that the
new icon, if we accept it, should have the same 4 versions.

> I do not understand your comments about sizes either. Did you perhaps 
> forget 16x16? I was just asking about 24x24 to be sure. Was that size 
> perhaps needed on another platform than w32?

All I know is that we now have only 32x32 and 48x48 icons in nt/icons.
That means these two sizes are enough to satisfy users' needs on
Windows.  So I asked for the new icon to be of the same sizes.

> The icon from Andrew actually include versions for 256 colors and 32-bit 
> colors (which I believe is for xp), but no 24-bit color version.

How many colors we have in nt/icons icons?

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>
> Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 13:28:57 -0800
> 
> There are 6 images in the .ico
> file. Two are 16x16 icons, I believe, one of which has the top-bound spiral
> notebook. Which of the two is the one intended as the default 16x16 image?

I was specifically talking about the single .ico file in the zip
archive sent by Andrew.

RE: Time to install the new icons

[Drew Adams]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 747 bytes --]

    > There are 6 images in the .ico
    > file. Two are 16x16 icons, I believe, one of which has the
    > top-bound spiral
    > notebook. Which of the two is the one intended as the default
    > 16x16 image?

    I was specifically talking about the single .ico file in the zip
    archive sent by Andrew.

So am I. There are 6 images in that single .ico file. I think there has been
some confustion over this.

Depending on how you open that .ico file, you might see only one of the
images. That's what threw me off at first also - I was seeing only the large
notebook image.

Attached are GIF versions of the 6 images in the .ico file, in case you
cannot view them in the .ico itself. Note that #1 and #4 are very similar,
as are #2 and #5.

[-- Attachment #2: emacs_nb_v103-1.gif --]
[-- Type: image/gif, Size: 1772 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #3: emacs_nb_v103-2.gif --]
[-- Type: image/gif, Size: 1375 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #4: emacs_nb_v103-3.gif --]
[-- Type: image/gif, Size: 1048 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #5: emacs_nb_v103-4.gif --]
[-- Type: image/gif, Size: 1920 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #6: emacs_nb_v103-5.gif --]
[-- Type: image/gif, Size: 1437 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #7: emacs_nb_v103-6.gif --]
[-- Type: image/gif, Size: 1041 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #8: Type: text/plain, Size: 142 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Lennart Borgman]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

>>And unfortunately I can not look at the png files in etc/images/icons. 
>>    
>>
>>The copies I have downloaded from CVS are perhaps broken on my pc. I am 
>>using w32 and cvsnt from Oct 9 2005. Must something special be done to 
>>download the images on w32?
>>    
>>
>
>I use -kb for all the files, and beyond that didn't need anything
>special.  The *.png files are marked -kb anyway, so I cannot imagine
>what could be the problem.
>  
>
Strange. I tried to download them again. Firefox says "The image file 
"file://...../emacs/etc/images/icons/emacs_16.png" cannot be displayed 
because it contains errors". Could it be cvsnt that is broken? (I do not 
suggest so because I do not at all know the details here. I just ask.)

BTW when trying to open the icon file within Emacs instead I get two 
different errors depending on how I do this. If I use C-x C-f 
(find-file) I get the error "Cannot determine image type". If I open the 
file from dired it is opened but displayed as text in a buffer where the 
command line says "(image)".  (But for Emacs it might be some of my 
patches for w32 that might be stopping some updates. I have to look 
throught these again.)

>Both: I say that we have now 32x32 and 48x48 icons, and each one has 2
>variants, one each for dark and light background.  And I say that the
>new icon, if we accept it, should have the same 4 versions.
>  
>
Can you then please tell me where these are?

>  
>
>>I do not understand your comments about sizes either. Did you perhaps 
>>forget 16x16? I was just asking about 24x24 to be sure. Was that size 
>>perhaps needed on another platform than w32?
>>    
>>
>
>All I know is that we now have only 32x32 and 48x48 icons in nt/icons.
>That means these two sizes are enough to satisfy users' needs on
>Windows.  So I asked for the new icon to be of the same sizes.
>  
>
I think I wrote long before that those sizes most of the time does not 
work very well for 16x16.

>  
>
>>The icon from Andrew actually include versions for 256 colors and 32-bit 
>>colors (which I believe is for xp), but no 24-bit color version.
>>    
>>
>
>How many colors we have in nt/icons icons?
>  
>
The current emacs.ico file contains only a 16-color icon 32x32 pixels. I 
do not think it looks very nice either when viewed as 32x32 or 16x16. I 
do not think it would be a good idea to use only a 16-color icon for 
Andrews pictures. I am however not sure if should try to make a 16-color 
version too (and I doubt it can be made good looking). I do not remember 
when it is used.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Lennart Borgman]

Drew Adams wrote:

>    
>Depending on how you open that .ico file, you might see only one of the
>images. That's what threw me off at first also - I was seeing only the large
>notebook image.
>  
>
Different sizes are used at different places. Different color depths are 
used depending on you display settings.

>Attached are GIF versions of the 6 images in the .ico file, in case you
>cannot view them in the .ico itself. Note that #1 and #4 are very similar,
>as are #2 and #5.
>
The difference between them are the color depths. The first three images 
have color depth 256 and the last three 32-bits for the colors.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Jason Rumney]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> I use -kb for all the files, and beyond that didn't need anything
> The *.png files are marked -kb anyway, so I cannot imagine what
> could be the problem.

The problem is that the *.png files are NOT marked -kb. I had to check
them out with -kb explicitly.

>> The icon from Andrew actually include versions for 256 colors and 32-bit 
>> colors (which I believe is for xp), but no 24-bit color version.

Windows 2000 and later support alpha transparency, so the 32 bit icons
should work there. Versions of windows before that only supported 256
colors in icons IIRC. So 24 bit versions are not needed.

Since we have a 16x16 icon, it should be included in the .ico files
along with the 32x32 and 48x48 versions so we do not end up with an
ugly scaled down mess like we have now.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Jason Rumney]

Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman.073@student.lu.se> writes:

> Strange. I tried to download them again. Firefox says "The image file
> "file://...../emacs/etc/images/icons/emacs_16.png" cannot be displayed
> because it contains errors".

Try again now. I marked those files as binary.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Lennart Borgman]

Jason Rumney wrote:

> Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman.073@student.lu.se> writes:
>
>> Strange. I tried to download them again. Firefox says "The image file
>> "file://...../emacs/etc/images/icons/emacs_16.png" cannot be displayed
>> because it contains errors".
>
>
> Try again now. I marked those files as binary.

Yes, that looks better.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>
> Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 15:22:06 -0800
> 
> So am I. There are 6 images in that single .ico file. I think there has been
> some confustion over this.

Indeed.

> Depending on how you open that .ico file, you might see only one of the
> images. That's what threw me off at first also - I was seeing only the large
> notebook image.

Given Lennart's and Jason's explanations, it sounds like Windows will
choose the right icon out of the 6.  So we need to decide whether all
of them are good.

We also need to see whether they look good on different backgrounds.
If they do, we don't need more variants.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Richard M. Stallman]

    1. Could we please include different color-scheme versions of the (same)
    icons in the Windows exe? In Windows (and perhaps on other platforms), it is
    easy for users to change the icon that they associate with a program.

I have nothing particularly against the idea, but it is not very
important, and if it were done now it would be a distraction from
getting the release ready.

So I ask people not to put effort into discussing this.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Chong Yidong]

> That's a different issue.  We currently have only 2 types of icons:
> for bright background and for dark background; no further color scheme
> support is available.  I say let's first decide whether we want to
> change the default icon, and if we do, let's after that see if we need
> to provide more support for color schemes.

It doesn't make sense to have a different icon for Windows, especially
since no one has produced any objections to Andrew's icons.  I dredge
up my old NT Emacs build, and verified that the .ico file that Andrew
provided work well.  (Windows automagically extracts the correct image
size from the .ico file, depending on the situation).  There are no
problems with background colors.

If there are no objections, I'll go ahead and install the .ico file in
the nt tree, sometime soon.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Cc: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> From: Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com>
> Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2005 23:31:25 -0500
> 
> If there are no objections, I'll go ahead and install the .ico file in
> the nt tree, sometime soon.

I already did.

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

Btw, shouldn't nt/emacs.rc use the new emacs.ico as the default icon?
For some reason, 7 years ago emacs.rc was changed to use gnu2a32t.ico
instead of emacs.ico.  Does anyone know why, and whether the reasons
for that change are still valid?

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Chong Yidong <cyd@stupidchicken.com>
> Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 22:22:07 -0500
> Cc: Andrew Zhilin <andrew_zhilin@yahoo.com>, emacs-devel@gnu.org,
> 	YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu <mituharu@math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp>, miles@gnu.org
> 
> I went ahead and checked in Andrew's icons, in png format, into
> etc/images/icons.  They are:
> 
>  emacs_16.png  emacs_24.png  emacs_32.png  emacs_48.png

That's fine, but why there is no ChangeLog entries for these new
files?

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Cc: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman.073@student.lu.se>,
>         andrew_zhilin@yahoo.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> From: Jason Rumney <jasonr@gnu.org>
> Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 01:00:52 +0000
> 
> Since we have a 16x16 icon, it should be included in the .ico files
> along with the 32x32 and 48x48 versions so we do not end up with an
> ugly scaled down mess like we have now.

Isn't it already so in the .ico file sent by Andrew?

If not, what should be done to add the 16x16 icon?

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Lennart Borgman]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

>>Cc: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman.073@student.lu.se>,
>>        andrew_zhilin@yahoo.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org
>>From: Jason Rumney <jasonr@gnu.org>
>>Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 01:00:52 +0000
>>
>>Since we have a 16x16 icon, it should be included in the .ico files
>>along with the 32x32 and 48x48 versions so we do not end up with an
>>ugly scaled down mess like we have now.
>>    
>>
>
>Isn't it already so in the .ico file sent by Andrew?
>
>If not, what should be done to add the 16x16 icon?
>  
>
The latest icon file from Andrew contains 2 16x16 bit icons. They do not 
look the same, please see 
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2005-11/msg01072.html. See 
icon 3 and 6. Unfortunately the background inside this copies are black 
so it might be a bit hard to understand how it looks, but you look at 
the page http://ourcomments.org/Emacs/NewIcons.html you can see the 
16x16 bits icons more clearly.

I believe we had no clear decision for which of the 16x16 bits icons to 
use. Am I wrong here?

Re: Time to install the new icons

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sat, 26 Nov 2005 13:53:26 +0100
> From: Lennart Borgman <lennart.borgman.073@student.lu.se>
> CC: Jason Rumney <jasonr@gnu.org>,  andrew_zhilin@yahoo.com, 
>  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> The latest icon file from Andrew contains 2 16x16 bit icons.

Yes, one for 256 colors, the other for True Color displays.

> I believe we had no clear decision for which of the 16x16 bits icons to 
> use. Am I wrong here?

Do we have to decide?  I thought Windows will choose the right icon,
won't it?