Bug#155680: PROPOSAL ] bump priority of window managers whic
>
> I'd like to hear some feedback from X experts on this, esp. Branden.
> I also think it would be good if Gnome had some sort of tropism for
> metacity/sawfish outside of the x-window-manager alternative, but
> that's somewhat orthogonal to this proposal.
>
> However, I have a gut feeling that window managers which provide more
> functionality <em>on their own</em> should generally have higher
> priority than those which don't. Unfortunately, I have the impression
> that this would doom metacity to a fairly low priority. Which is why
> I think Gnome should have its own internal tropism for its favored
> window managers.
>
> I'd also like to hear from the KDE, XFCE and GNUstep camps, to see if
> they really buy into this new standard you refer to.
>
> But bottom line, if Branden approves, then I will probably go along.
>
Hi, I maintain and upstream the blackbox window manager.
Most of the large desktop environments are making their software support the
netwm spec. Kwin was actually on of the first. So netwm is supported although
like all standards it has its issues.
We (blackbox) plan to support netwm in a near future release.
However, netwm only really makes sense when combined with other environments.
twm is a perfectly reasonable wm until you try to use GNOME or KDE. Same with
fvwm or the other window managers.
I think the real thing to say is GNOME, KDE, etc should not ask for
x-window-manager but netwm-window-manager.
Reply to: