Re: [desktop] why kde and gnome's menu situation sucks
On 10/23/2002 11:34 PM, Daniel Burrows at firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 10:33:08PM -0400, Luke Seubert
> <email@example.com> was heard to say:
>> What you are suggesting in general, QT Apps in the menu when running KDE and
>> GTK apps in the menu when running GTK compatible GUIs has great merit. It
>> seems that a consensus is emerging to do just that.
> What do you do the rest of the time? (say, when running XFce or a
> "bare" window manager)
Good question. For something like XFce, which if I recall correctly, has
good bindings to GTK apps, I would say go with a GTK based menu, i.e. the
default menu used with Gnome.
For the really neutral "bare" window managers that have no QT or GTK
preference, well, I guess we would need a few flamewars to hash that one out
Obviously, you could use xcdroast for a cd burner in such a situation. But
there probably aren't enough non-QT, non-GTK, X-only applications to fill
out a complete menu of applications suitable for a fully powered desktop.
I guess at that point, bite the bullet and pick QT or GTK on the basis of
technical merit. Which has the most best of breed apps that run faster and
with fewer bugs? (See what I mean about needing some flamewars to resolve
Sorry, but that is the best answer I can come up with for now :-/ Happily,
a fair number the non-QT window managers seem to have latched onto GTK, so
there shouldn't be too many truly bare window managers where we have to hash
this all out over.