On 13 Nov 2003 01:37:30 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 04:41:46 +0000, Mikhael Goikhman <migo_at_homemail.com> said:
>
> > On 11 Nov 2003 16:24:07 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >>
> >> I would be happy if people took my patches.
>
> > You are welcome to send patches that improve the deb package we
> > provide. However if you speak about hooks and other ancient things,
> > I see them as a clear deterioration. This will not be applied. The
> > configuration in your patch are so ancient (from 5-7 years ago?)
> > that it makes no sence to start to fix it. It should be dropped. We
> > already provide 2 sets of configurations for a user without any
> > fvwm2rc. Maintaining more configurations that are also distribution
> > specific is meaningless.
>
> I am not wedded to the configuration examples. If that is your
> sole objection, then it is easl=ily fixed.
>
> > We also don't add any distribution specific legacy things to our
> > rpms. The binary packages from developers are clean and include
> > only the things installed on a regular "make install". With addition
> > of all mandatory stuff to pass the package requirements and minor
> > usability things.
>
> Are we still speaking of the examples?
I am speaking about the patch of 1.2Mb that you apply.
It would be acceptable if you apply a patch of 500b, but at this point
you just package something else, not what we release.
> I note that the packages provided do not integrate well into
> Debian's menu system, nor do they integrate with the alternatives
> system;
Try the latest cvs, I think this is all handled at the needed minimum.
> and, off hand, I do not see a system wide default fvwmrc.
fvwm is best to be run without any system wide fvwmrc, especially the one
written 5-7 years ago. The users then gets a menu and a choice to setup
2 configurations we maintain. There is also the third choice, fvwm-themes.
> Are these
> the legacy things you refer to? If so, I am afraid that the packages
> provided by Debian must remain diverged; some of these are required by
> the need to present an consistent integration of window managers into
> Debian.
To do it propertly, I would package fvwm-legacy that could be installed
by the users who need it on top of the clean deb (most of the users do
not need this additional package).
> I am not the official maintainer of FVWM in Debian, but I'll
> try and see if I can get him to cede the apckage to me, when I'll
> have greater control over the default configuration.
I don't really worry about any specific distribution and their internal
politics, the only thing I worry is to get much less distribution specific
questions/problems on this list.
Regards,
Mikhael.
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL: http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a
message to majordomo_at_fvwm.org.
To report problems, send mail to fvwm-owner_at_fvwm.org.
Received on Thu Nov 13 2003 - 06:21:35 GMT