New icons for the mozilla packages
eric at debian.org
Sat Nov 25 08:15:48 CET 2006
* Mike Hommey (mh at glandium.org) wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 10:52:24AM -0500, Eric Dorland <eric at debian.org> wrote:
> > * Alexander Sack (asac at jwsdot.com) wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 08:04:03AM +0100, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 12:24:45AM +0100, Alexander Sack <asac at debian.org> wrote:
> > > > > Is the brand sunbird mentioned somewhere in the calendar ui or is it
> > > > > just called calendar?
> > > >
> > > > It is called sunbird. I could rename it calendar, though.
> > >
> > > IMO, it should be called "iceape calendar", as it is not sunbird
> > > ... you can find tri-licensed logos here:
> > >
> > > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=309293
> > So do we want to go with one of these icon sets?
> There is also the issue about urls, such as the one you go to when
> clicking the throbber, or the default homepage, or the temporary
> homepage you get after upgrades... I was thinking we could use about: as
> target for these, with a special about:upgrade or something like that
> being a modified version with a message about the software being
> For iceape, I'm considering backporting the about: from iceweasel for
> this, because it's so much prettier...
There's no need to use about:, we can just file:/// urls and put pages
in the package, or (I think especially the case of upgrade page) just
disable those special pages altogether.
I'm still not getting a clear answer as to which icons we should go
Eric Dorland <eric at kuroneko.ca>
ICQ: #61138586, Jabber: hooty at jabber.com
1024D/16D970C6 097C 4861 9934 27A0 8E1C 2B0A 61E9 8ECF 16D9 70C6
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-mozilla-maintainers/attachments/20061125/5e28bba8/attachment.pgp
More information about the pkg-mozilla-maintainers