Color Theme and Icon Theme

[cos-overclock]

I really like Sigma File Manager. It has a modern design, and its wide range of features is very easy to use.

One thing I have felt, though, is that the default fallback icons do not distinguish file types very clearly, which makes the file list a little harder to scan. On the other hand, using system icons does not always match Sigma's UI as well as I would like.

Because of that, I started experimenting with support for Color Themes and Icon Themes, similar to what we see in VS Code and other applications.

Below are screenshots of a prototype implementation using Catppuccin-based Color Themes and Icon Themes.

Catppuccin Latte

Catppuccin Frappe

Catppuccin Macchiato

Catppuccin Mocha

I also updated the settings UI as shown below.
Instead of having separate system icon options for folders and files, users can now choose an Icon Theme directly.

Settings

I am very happy with how this turned out.

What I would like to discuss is whether themes and icon themes like these should be built into the application itself, or whether they should be added as extensions.

Here is how I currently see the trade-offs:

• If they are built into the application

  • Everyone can use them immediately
  • Adding new themes or icon themes would require changes to the main application
  • Bundling icon assets in the app would increase installation size

• If they are provided as extensions

  • Users can install only what they want
  • Themes and icon themes can be developed and distributed independently
  • It becomes easier for third parties to create and share their own themes

In my prototype, Color Themes and Icon Themes can be provided separately as extensions.
Once installed, they appear in the Theme and Icon Theme dropdowns in Settings.

Extensions

I would love to hear what everyone thinks.

Would it be better to:

1. ship a few additional themes and icon themes as built-in features,
2. support them primarily as extensions,
3. or use a hybrid approach?

[aleksey-hoffman]

Good suggestion mate, I'm looking into it

[cos-overclock]

Quick update: I opened two PRs related to this idea.

• UX (extensions): support contributed color themes #419: extension support for Color Themes
• UX (extensions): support contributed icon themes #421: extension support for Icon Themes

These implement the extension-based approach discussed here, where theme packs can be installed separately instead of being bundled directly into Sigma File Manager.

I also created Catppuccin-based test extensions for both features:

• Color Themes: https://github.com/cos-overclock/sfm-catppuccin-themes
• Icon Themes: https://github.com/cos-overclock/sfm-catppuccin-icon-themes

Hope these are useful as references.

[cos-overclock]

Thank you for the review and for merging this PR.
Based on your feedback, I created an extension that combines the color theme and icon theme. (https://github.com/cos-overclock/sigma-file-manager)
I also added this change to the official Catppuccin issue. (catppuccin/catppuccin#3072)

However, since it may take some time before the official Catppuccin issue is reviewed and merged, I will also open a PR to https://github.com/sigma-hub/sfm-marketplace.
If it is adopted by Catppuccin, I will update the ID and submit another PR.

[aleksey-hoffman]

@cos-overclock I read their license, I think we can actually add your extension to registry without making them the "publisher". The extension is created and published by you, so you can be the "publisher", their MIT license doesn't prohibit using your own creation

[aleksey-hoffman]

One question though, why the repo name is cos-overclock/sigma-file-manager (looks more like fork of the app) and not something more descriptive like:

• cos-overclock/sigma-file-manager-themes
• cos-overclock/sfm-themes
• cos-overclock/sfm-catppuccin-themes
• cos-overclock/sfm-extension-themes
• cos-overclock/sfm-extension-catppuccin-themes

[cos-overclock]

I read their license, I think we can actually add your extension to registry without making them the "publisher". The extension is created and published by you, so you can be the "publisher", their MIT license doesn't prohibit using your own creation

Thank you for checking the license.

The current extension is published under cos-overclock/sigma-file-manager, with cos-overclock as the publisher.

I opened an issue in the Catppuccin repository because having the theme listed under the official Catppuccin organization would improve discoverability and give users more confidence that it is an official Catppuccin port.

In the meantime, while waiting for the official Catppuccin review/adoption process, I would like to register the current cos-overclock/sigma-file-manager extension in sigma-hub/sfm-marketplace.(sigma-hub/sfm-marketplace#1)

If the Catppuccin issue is accepted later and the extension can be moved to catppuccin/sigma-file-manager, I will submit a follow-up PR to replace the marketplace entry with the official Catppuccin repository.

One question though, why the repo name is cos-overclock/sigma-file-manager (looks more like fork of the app) and not something more descriptive like:

• cos-overclock/sigma-file-manager-themes
• cos-overclock/sfm-themes
• cos-overclock/sfm-catppuccin-themes
• cos-overclock/sfm-extension-themes
• cos-overclock/sfm-extension-catppuccin-themes

Regarding the repository name, my understanding is that Catppuccin ports should use the target application/tool name in lower-kebab-case, based on Catppuccin's port creation guidelines. Since the target application is Sigma File Manager, I believe sigma-file-manager would be the appropriate repository name if the port is accepted under the official Catppuccin organization.

Catppuccin's port creation guide says: "The name of the repo must be the app's name in lower-kebab-case", with unreal-engine given as an example.

[aleksey-hoffman]

Thank you, let's add it to the marketplace, I added a comment in your PR