Bug#677935: Bug#505924: cwm
James.
I still have a few issues:
1.) I didn't notice it first time but the last paragraph of the long
description is a bit like advertising.
2.) The upstream changelog issue is still there. I seem to recall
suggesting some solutions but at the least there should be a lintian
override.
3.) I am suspicious of cwm.postinst. I could look into what is required
a bit more, but let me know what you think about that.
On 14/11/12 23:25, Nicholas Bamber wrote:
> James,
> I got round to downloading the package today.
>
> On 27/10/12 15:47, James McDonald wrote:
>> Hi Nicholas,
>>
>> Finally found some time to implement these changes!
>>
>> On 21 Sep 2012, at 01:56, Nicholas Bamber <nicholas@periapt.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> I followed your advice and it works. I can see the attraction of using
>>> cwm this way. However it might just be a step too far for me as copy and
>>> paste seems not to work.
>>
>> That might depend on which software you're using. For example, xterm will only support select-to-copy, middleclick-to-paste whereas eg gnome-terminal supports copy and paste in the Gnome/KDE fashion as well. The window manager itself doesn't restrict this but I know I've had similar frustrations mixing apps from different toolkits.
>>
>>> then indeed I do get cwm. However the key bindings (as documented in the
>>> man page) do not work. However I also notice that even under
>>> LXDE/openbox the xterm key bindings do not work. So I suspect it might
>>> be an LXDE issue. I'll try and follow up with the LXDE people.
>>
>> That's interesting. I haven't had a chance to experiment with LXDE but that does sound like something else in its session is trapping key bindings.
>>
>>> Actually I can fairly easily sponsor you to get access to collab-maint
>>> and I've done so for people before. On the other hand github is fine and
>>> I use it for some of my packages. If you really want to own the
>>> packaging then go for github or equivalent. If you're happy to let DD's
>>> step in and fix problems directly in the repository then go for
>>> collab-maint.
>>
>> Getting access to collab-maint would be great. I have actually pushed my changes to github at https://github.com/jamesmcdonald/cwm/tree/v5.1-debian but I've still not set it up to use git-buildpackage. It's really just so I can track my own changes at this point. I intend to set cwm up for git-based builds in the future, even if just so I can learn how to do that.
>>
>>> On 20/09/12 15:29, James McDonald wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Recommendation might make sense, but not dependency as it's possible to run a window manager on one host for an X server on a remote host. I will look at what some other simple window managers do.
>>>
>>> Could be Suggests as well.
>>
>> I've investigated several other window managers and it looks like they don't make any recommendation/suggestion about having X itself installed. They only recommend associated projects, like metacity recommends gnome-session. On that basis, I should probably omit this.
>>
>>> I was really hoping that this would be a drop in replacement for
>>> openbox. I am not clear if this is doable. I am sure that the
>>> README.Debian should document this (and similar) experiments.
>>
>> In theory it should be possible to use it like that. Unfortunately it depends on the restrictions imposed by the environment (LXDE, Gnome etc). I shall set up a machine to experiment with this, but I guess it will be a while before I have any coherent documentation. I agree that it would be nice to be able to provide some tips for this sort of usage. Do you feel this is necessary before the package is uploaded?
>>
>>> Anyway the package seems to do what it says on the tin. So I think there
>>> is a good chance I should be able to upload your next build.
>>
>> I've uploaded the latest version to mentors; here's a log from git of the changes I've made:
>>
>> Fixed double spaces in package description.
>> Changed debhelper dependency from >=9.0.0 to >=9
>> Removed references to 9wm from the package description.
>> Added Provides: x-window-manager
>> Added scripts to handle x-window-manager alternative
>>
>> Please let me know what you think.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> James
>>
>>
>
Reply to: