[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Future of fvwm2-plus

On Tue, Dec 01, 1998 at 11:29:10PM -0800, David N. Welton wrote:
> Hi, I wanted to ask the group opinion on the future of this package.
> What with a new job in San Francisco, I'm really not sure I'll have
> time to do it justice, and it isn't all that different from fvwm2 (it
> has IconGravity and a few other little patches).  Does anyone actually
> use it?  Like it?  See a need for it?  If not, maybe it could be moved
> somewhere like orphaned or experimental, so as not to destroy the work
> already done.
> Opinions?

I think if fvwm2-plus is a better product than fvwm2 (even if it isn't the
"clean" upstream version) then why not (keep it).  I see there is an fvwm2.1
beta on the ftp site (no I havn't tried it yet).

fvwm2 has some annoying behaviours, if fvwm2-plus is nicer then cool.  I
can't actually remember which one it is I'm running :-)


email: adrian.bridgett@zetnet.co.uk, http://www.poboxes.com/adrian.bridgett
Windows NT - Unix in beta-testing.   PGP key available on public key servers
Avoid tiresome goat sacrifices  -=-  use Debian Linux http://www.debian.org

Reply to: