Re: Please review package description of (open)motif
Paul Gevers wrote:
> Agreeing with your argument, I would go for
> Description: Motif Window Manager
>>> contains the Motif window manager, which has clear but classical appearance,
>> "(It) has clear appearance" sounds like it's missing an article.
>> (Classical? Now I'm imagining a Roman mosaic tiled window manager.)
> Sorry, I am not a native speaker. I try to say that it looks a dated
> (already a decade). Would that be a better word than?
It's possible that it should really be "classic", but you'll notice I
kept "classical" in my patch; it makes rather a good euphemism for "so
antique it's stylish". It even makes me think of all those chiselled
edges as a sort of monumental-architecture feature.
>>> and xmbind, which is used to configure virtual key bindings for motif.
>> Since we're not pressed for space here I'll suggest expanding this to
>> "virtual key/mouse-bindings".
> Sure. Maybe we should even focus less on xmbind. Make the first part
> about MWM end with a full stop and mention it more as an auxiliary tool:
> This package contains the Motif window manager, which has a clear but
> classical appearance. It is accompanied by xmbind, which is used to
> configure virtual key/mouse-bindings for Motif.
Yes, that works.
>> (So "OpenMotif" is the old non-free version and now it's gone LGPL
>> it's called plain "Motif"? Okay, confusing.)
> Yes. Indeed. Motif has been used in the past for the group of software
> implementations of motif: the paid variant, the free (but not dsfg-free)
> version openmotif and lesstif, which was the only really free
> implementation of motif.
By sheer coincidence your initial mail reached me just as I finished
finally uninstalling (nedit and therefore) lesstif2 on my desktop.
JBR with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package