LiteStep OTS

As 'OTS' proves itself to be a genuine 'standard' unlike the handful of failed attempts preceding it...that would probably be a sensible move.
Up till OTS, there really was never a 'standard' that worked and all 'STEP themers had their own way of doing things...I'm a perfect example...now my theme system is so damn big I'm still too chicken to try to convert it to OTS just so the newbies can adopt it...

It might be worthwhile if sometime in the future there was a check box or boxes, such as those found when uploading a Windowblinds skin, to indicate OTS, LSDistro (although I think this approach is dying), or non-standard. I follow the OTS particularly on this site because it is heavily populated by potential new users of LS and OTS is the easiest way to become aquainted with Litestep.

that reminds me... what ever happened to d'mer? he was making some great LS themes that were easy for any level of competence. (cept me, I still couldn't figure em out)

David...d'mer has had things to do in 'Real Life'[tm] that are more important than LiteSTEP....but I'm sure he'll be back [or else]....

Just curious. What's OTS? One-Toed Sloth? Is it another standardized LS distro specification?

OTS = Open Theme Standard. It's a structered approach to themeing Litestep and is a kind of distro spec. You can learn about it at
http://www.beyondconvention.net/ohussain/ots/index.htm

OTS skins also seem to have the fewest issues with XP. But then it might have also been my sleep deprived high on caffiene brain causing the problems.

If StarDock is looking for where to take DesktopX then the modules LiteStep has are very impressive. They might think about getting somebody just to create modules similar those in LiteStep. Last time I messed with DesktopX they had a handful of objects. Although the configuration of DesktopX appears much simpler.

Well I'd like to go semi-offtopic and ask you LiteSteppers a couple of questions since I've always been tempted to try it (actually I tried it once a few years ago and ended up screaming and running for the hills.

I normally use Winstep(NextStart and WorkShelf) for two reasons: I can easily switch between themes (i.e. the theme is independent of the configuration) and I like Winstep's abilities to bump the screen edges to display NextStart menus and workshelf since I normally run my apps in max window mode.

From the sound of it, OTS addresses the first issue by reducing the pain of having to reconfigure on every theme-switch.

As for my 2nd issues, does LiteStep's popup menu and wharf (assuming the wharf is freefloating) have the ability to react to bumping the screen edges? Or are there different popup menu and wharf implementations that do this? Thanks for entertaining my questions.

http://www.shellfront.org/shells/litestep/litestep_installer-2.0.exe

This has been working well for me so far. Works even on a per user basis (the sig. other hates customizing the computer).

Changing themes that are OTS works well with it. Non-OTS gives very mixed results. Haven't tried uninstalling it yet.

www.shellfront.org and joeblade.com/litestep/tutorials answered most of my questions.

If I understand the question correctly, it customary for themers to set the desktop area to leave about a 4 pixel edge around maximized programs so there is a small area of the desktop exposed that you can right-click on it and get to the popup. You still have to click though, bumping alone won't do it. You can also get to the popup by hitting the Windows key, the popup will show up wherever your mouse is located.

Regarding the wharf, hardly anyone uses them anymore (myself included) so I don't know much about them. Some of the old school themers, like Jafo (I know I'm going to hear abou that), may have more to say about that.

Hope that helps

Most Litestep modules have the ability to be hidden and shown. They don't usually have that bump edge feature built in though.
To create a "bump" edge along the screen edge to acivate a hide\show is easy though by using other modules such as hotspots. You define an area of the screen (like the very bottom pixel along the screen) and when the mouse enters that area it activates the hide\show of whatever ever modules you define.
Some modules do have a "snap to the edge of the screen" feature though including wharf and systray. Don't think that's a feature commonly used though, as most modules are specifically placed right down to the pixel via configuration in the step.rc.

On the original topic, I think an OTS flag or designation mught be a good long term feature for the litestep section. But I'd wait a bit before doing that.

The Litestep dev team was recently revamped with a fair bit of new blood and has promised a .24.7 version of litestep soon. They plan for that to be the last in the line of .24. official releases before they move on to the .25. line. The .24.7 version should be pretty close to what we see now with the unofficial dev\shellfront builds (not counting builds from the last two weeks - thats a whole nother story). I believe the current push to .24.7 is bug fixes and stability, mind you I find the recent builds (2002) very stable anyway.

With .24.7 in our hands, if things configuration wise haven't changed, that might be an appropriate time to see if we can talk the admins here into an OTS button or flag for Litestep theme submissions.

hehe, that one point of view (long winded at that) anyway.

Thanks for the info folks, and now back to our regularly scheduled OTS thread...

On a bit of a spin off of the original topic as well, I'm curious to see what others thing of recent dev team developments, as well as continual recent Litestep development by third partys.

Personal opinion... the third party builds are the direct result of the dev team cloistering themselves. Given the general low morale of the users due to several coders leaving, and the lack of visible activity or interaction by the dev team it was inevitable that a few of the more active/creative individuals would try to "keep things moving".

The other problem I think the dev team will run into is that no matter what .24.7 looks like, no one will be satisfied due to the perceived "back room" approach they are taking. I think they will end up feeling unappreciated for the hard work they are doing on the next build and may get demoralized.

Having said this while I'm looking forward to the new build,I'm lowering my expectations because I think, like you seem to, that this will be a featureless build and simply be a bug/stability fix. Not a bad thing but not the type of thing you'd expect after all the hubub.

Sounds like we're pretty much on the same wavelength jcg.

I am looking forward to what the new team puts out, but the third party builds are quite interesting, and if they keep adding features at the rate they have over the last two weeks; users and themers may be forced with a choice of new bleeding edge but unofficial builds, or official builds that seem like a step back.

Maybe not so much a problem for users, but for themers like ourselves, we want to make use of cool new features but you don't want to put out a theme that has a bunch of users stuck with broken themes cause they're running official builds that don't support the new stuff.

It will all shake out I'm sure. The list of folks they have got on the dev team is impressive. There are some names from way back and include guys from other shell scenes as well. If the new team had just been implemented in a more forthright manner, focusing on building concensus and positive community support, the possibilities would be practically endless.

Even though that hasn't happened, I think the new team can still come up with some great stuff. I wonder if they wouldn't be wise to make use of some of the new blood that's been pumping out the new features. Those are some features that have been asked for, for a long time. Once these new guys put they're minds to it, the features appeared in no time.

*sigh* I guess we'll have to wait and see. I just hate waiting

Listen to Phar0e re the 'bumping' of edges/hotspots stuff, etc....he covered it all....

As for directions of LS.....I think it suffers a bit from the Linux Malady....too many Egos in an open source environment.
I'm happy to sit back and grab bits of a dev build, as and when they pop up, adding them to my 'mix' of stuff, and 'IF' they are 'better' [my view], I'll adopt them.
Currently, I'm using 'most' of 13 02 2002, but before that it was 02 01 2001...didn't much care for anything in between.
Likewise, with 3rd party modules, I check out all the newer versions of the ones I use...but again I don't automatically adopt them, not without evaluating them.

Now, by uploading full 'shells', and not just the 'theme' part, which relies on the user having the CORRECT Core to interact properly with the rc coding AND the included modules, it's possible to get one of my 'themes' running quite painlessly, if you have a shell loader and are happy to pop back into exploder, do some folder renaming, and pop back into LS.

Getting the 'hang' of older theme 'methods' means you can grab an old famous theme, such as Doodle's Turtlesoup and have it running within 5 minutes of downloading it....[I know, cos I have].
The OTS 'method' 'should' make this sort of thing redundant....[eventually], but there will still be 'odd' situations/configurations which will demand more than OTS will be able to deliver.
The problem with LiteSTEP is it has unlimited potential for diversity, from the whacky to the weird, whith practical included in there as well.

When I'm insane enough, I'll convert my multi-themeing system to be OTS compatible, as well as retain my own functionality....[but I'm not quite demented or masochistic
enough...yet]....

I'll admit, OTS is not for everyone, especially seasoned themers. It does restrict some of the things you can do. But it is the easiest way, IMHO, for new users to get started.

In my cse I'm glad I didn't have OTS when I started. Heck, the first time I tried Litestep I scared the hell out of myself when I thought I killed my computer (the old Reinstall windows error). But I just had to have D'mer's Polymer skin running on my machine and NextStart dragged my system down to a crawl. But Dmer's theme was for a different resolution so I had to start learning how to tweak themes. Skinning Litestep was never in my thoughts. Go figure.

jcg....I started with a b21 release which, when you look back from here was incredibly basic, but, by startic from this simple end and following each new added complication/improvement, the learning curve was a simple time-line. For people new to LS, OTS very definitely will be the solution.
If and when they begin themeing for themselves, I just hope they don't remain too closetted within OTS and take a look at the big wide outdoors too...

It's not that hard... if you can find the documentation that is.

I noticed with some skins that they recommended uninstalling, reinstall and then put their skin in. Is this typical of non-OTS skins?

no no, one should be able to drop the new theme into the theme directory. Then select the new theme with the theme selector or deit the step.rc to point to the new theme. Either method works, I follow the second method myself. If the theme has been properly set up to OTS structure, that's all it will take.

For those following the dev team discusion in this thread, interesting to note that overnight the "official" dev team has added a new member - one of those new young coders who were mentioned above.
Definetly a move in the right direction. YaY!

Phar0e;

Just read that on LS List, great move.

Griffinme;

That used to be a very common practice for older themes and a small number still do it. It is possible to convert just about any theme to OTS. As a matter of fact there is someone on the LS list that is undertaking the enormous task of converting all themes (~5000) to OTS. I usually do it before I run a theme, keeps it neat and tidy

How hard is to convert them?
Is there a HowTo describing it?

I would like to get the skin iBDE V4 to work.
I'm not sure if I am implementing it right or if it doesn't like XP. Some of the graphics show up but almost none of the modules work.

The big difference is uaually module and image paths. There are a few to define and make sure your theme matches up in the step.rc
With OTS it goes like this:

Litestep's directory is identified as:
$LitestepDir$
you don't have to define the path to that directory in the step.rc. Litestep does that internally.

The theme directory (for any given theme)is:
$ThemeDir$
The path to that is:
$LiteStepDir$themes\themeABC\
You do define that path in the step.rc

The images directory is defined as:
$LSImageFolder$
The path to that directory is:
$ThemeDir$images\
You don't have to define that in the step, but I think its a good idea to.

The core modules are stored right in the main litestep directory so thats pretty easy:
LoadModule $LitestepDir$desktop2.dll as example

The Third party mods are stored in a directory in the theme directory called modules. Define it this way in the step.rc:
ModulesDir "$ThemeDir$modules\"
Then make sure your third party modules paths point the correct way:
LoadModule $ModulesDir$layercut.dll for example.

So image and module locations, and paths (as defined in the step) are the main concerns.
They must match up to work.

This could all be a little confusing. But keep asking and we'll help as best we can.