Patrice Fortier <Patrice.Fortier_at_emi.u-bordeaux.fr> writes:
>
>
> Brady Montz wrote:
> > I think the best way to proceed is to get a clear answer to the question:
> > What improvements need to be made to fvwm which would make it all around
> > cooler, smaller, faster, and/or better, from which adding a module to make
> > it look and feel like windows 95 would just fall out?
>
> Well, maybe I'm wrong but I think the only thing which makes fvwm95
> interesting for the standard-user is the Win95-look.
> As most of the users didn't even looked at the .fvwm2rc95 (or just
> added a couple of menu entries), if we can emulate the Win95 look just
> like fvwm95, we can can almost consider that the merging is done :).
> I didn't look at the -solid option of andrew's titlebar patch, but as
> mini-icons will (should :)) be included in the next fvwm2 beta
> version...
>
>
> Just my 10 centimes...
>
> Lokh.
It's not just what makes fvwm95 interesting to the user. It's also what makes
it interesting to the people writing the code for it. Just adding the win95
stuff to fvwm is not by itself a guarantee that they are going to stop
developing fvwm95. As is pointed out by others in this thread, the two window
managers are diverging in more ways than just titlebars and such.
Also, not everybody wants to see more and more code getting added to fvwm.
--
Brady Montz
bradym_at_cs.arizona.edu
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.hpc.uh.edu/fvwm/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a
message to majordomo_at_hpc.uh.edu.
To report problems, send mail to fvwm-owner_at_hpc.uh.edu.
Received on Tue Oct 22 1996 - 14:44:12 BST