replacing kcontrol with system settings

[Benjamin Meyer]

>> and they were removed for good reasons.
>
> Ellen Reitmayr, who worked with the system settings team to ensure  
> usability,
> told me that much stuff was left out "because kcontrol is still  
> there for the
> power users"

Well she was wrong, that is not why I originally removed it.

> The reason I am especially concerned about the theme manager is  
> that it is
> important for partially sighted users. If you portray this  
> accessibility
> advise as the unimportant view of just "one person", then we can  
> just as well
> shut down the HCI working group.

Accessibility is very important, but just because we had something  
one way before doesn't mean that we have to continue doing it the  
exact same way forever.

>> Putting them both in kcontrol is (and was) just stupid.  It just begs
>> the user question: "Which is the right way to configure my
>> background?"  How would we document that action?
>
> I agree with this usability concern, and I am not objecting to fix  
> this
> problem. I am only objecting to fix it the GNOME way (remove all  
> stuff that
> has usability bugs, instead of fixing the usability bugs).
>
> Olaf

Please go and read my e-mails again.  I didn't suggested removing it  
completely, but that it should be turned it into its own  
application.  It is a lot more then just a a simple frontend to a  
settings file, it could let you download, install, configure, create,  
modify and share themes.  The theme manager just sticks out like a  
sore thumb and doesn't fit with the rest of the dialog which are for  
the most part little more then front ends to config dialogs.

-Benjamin Meyer