search

emesene / emesene-supported-plugins

set of plugins supported by the emesene team
http://www.emesene.org
15 stars 11 forks source link

Classic Conversation theme (Adium sucks!!) #53

Open ghost opened 12 years ago

ghost commented 12 years ago

Hello , Is it possible to use empathy's classic conversation theme on emesene 2.11.11 ? I attach a screenshot of the theme : http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/8/screenshotmanolis.png

I tried a lot adium themes without bubles (only text) but they dont look good or they are not compatible.. Also i tried text output instead of adium but i cannot configure it and the messages are too big with big gaps etc

So is it possible to add empathy's classic theme on emesene ?

c10ud commented 12 years ago

if it's an adium theme you just copy it in the emesene user directory and it should work!

2011/12/20 ALdaperan reply@reply.github.com:

Hello , Is it possible to use empathy's classic conversation theme on emesene 2.11.11 ? I attach a screenshot of the theme : http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/8/screenshotmanolis.png

I tried a lot adium themes without bubles (only text) but they dont look good or they are not compatible.. Also i tried text output instead of adium but i cannot configure it and the messages are too big with big gaps etc

So is it possible to add empathy's classic theme on emesene ?

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/emesene/emesene-supported-plugins/issues/53

ghost commented 12 years ago

Yes but i cant find it in any directory I wonder if it is extra theme or preinstalled with empathy :(

c10ud commented 12 years ago

it might be worth taking a look at http://www.adiumxtras.com/ or if you really want that one ask empathy devs..but the website really has many styles

2011/12/20 ALdaperan reply@reply.github.com:

Yes but i cant find it in any directory I wonder if it is extra theme or preinstalled with empathy :(

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/emesene/emesene-supported-plugins/issues/53#issuecomment-3216728