Bug#167004: add ewmh-x-window-manager alternative, drop EWMH section from priority, add virtual package ewmh-x-window-manager
Package: debian-policy
It turns out that just bumping the priority of x-window-managers like
metacity which implement the EWMH spec isn't enough. Other window
managers like twm still take priority, mainly because they support the
Debian menu system directly (which metacity doesn't, it relies on the
GNOME panel to do it).
So I think what we really need is an ewmh-x-window-manager, that
packages like gnome-wm can use to explicitly invoke a window manager
which supports the EWMH spec.
Attached is a patch which:
1) Removes the (now unneeded) section from the x-window-manager priority
calculation
2) Adds a new alternative ewmh-x-window-manager
3) Adds a new virtual package ewmh-x-window-manager
--- policy.sgml~ 2002-10-29 20:29:33.000000000 -0500
+++ policy.sgml 2002-10-29 20:28:27.000000000 -0500
@@ -7010,16 +7010,6 @@
points.
</p>
</item>
- <item>
- <p>
- If the window manager complies with <url
- id="http://www.freedesktop.org/standards/wm-spec.html";
- name="The Window Manager Specification Project">,
- written by the <url id="http://www.freedesktop.org";
- name="Free Desktop Group">, add 20 points.
- </p>
- </item>
-
<item>
<p>
If the window manager permits the X session to be
@@ -7033,6 +7023,25 @@
</sect1>
<sect1>
+ <heading>Packages providing an EWMH-compliant window manager</heading>
+
+ <p>
+ In addition to providing <file>/usr/bin/x-window-manager</file>,
+ window managers which implement the EWMH hints specified by the
+ <url id="http://www.freedesktop.org/standards/wm-spec.html";
+ name="The Window Manager Specification Project"/>
+ should also register themselves as an alternative for
+ <file>/usr/bin/ewmh-x-window-manager</file>. The priority
+ should be calculated in the same way as
+ for <file>/usr/bin/x-window-manager</file>.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ These packages should also provide the virtual
+ package <tt>ewmh-x-window-manager</tt>.
+ </p>
+ </sect1>
+
+ <sect1>
<heading>Packages providing fonts</heading>
<p>
Reply to: