Re: [PATCH] Icon themes clean-up

Fallback is now [1] much simpler than before

OUString ImplImageTree::fallbackStyle(const OUString& rsStyle)
{
    OUString sResult;

    if (rsStyle == "colibre" || rsStyle == "helpimg")
        sResult = "";
    else if (rsStyle == "sifr_dark" )
        sResult = "breeze_dark";
    else if (rsStyle == "sifr" || rsStyle == "breeze_dark")
        sResult = "breeze";
    else
        sResult = "colibre";

    return sResult;
}

Before it was Galaxy to what Industrial fell back, and Galaxy to empty. To my knowledge there is 
nothing like an annotation of icon theme extension - and I wouldn't implement it.

[1] https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/#/c/52118/3/vcl/source/image/ImplImageTree.cxx

On 12.05.2018 13:01, Michael Meeks wrote:
> Hi Heiko,
>
> On 12/05/18 11:03, Heiko Tietze (via Code Review) wrote:
> >     https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/54158
>
>       As per IRC:
>
>       wrt. the INDUSTRIAL_FALLBACK in postprocess/ foo.mk
>
>       Just delete all of the lines that have that mentioned =)
>
>       Having said all this - it makes me wonder how we do fallbacks inside
> the product. ie. when you package this icon theme and up-load it as an
> extension - does that annotate inside the theme which other theme .zip's
> it falls-back to at run-time: such that we do get industrial layered on
> tango layered on colibre eg. ? or do we just get a ton of missing icons
> when that's installed.
>
>       HTH,
>
>               Michael.

-- 
Dr. Heiko Tietze
UX designer
Tel. +49 (0)179/1268509

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature