-- John Kodis <kodis jagunet com> spake thusly:
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2002 at 03:15:02AM -0800, Seth Nickell wrote:
>
>> ... we the future potential for a window manager + theme combo that
>> is a lot better, ...
>
> I assume that you're refering to Metacity being a lot better than
> Sawfish. If so, in what way is Sawfish deficient or is Metacity much
> better? Just curious, I have trouble keeping up with all the new
> window managers that are available.
I decided to do a bit of research on Metacity, and found the following
description on the Gnome Apps site:
Metacity is a window manager based on GTK+ 2.0 I am hacking
on for fun. It uses GTK to draw frames and Pango to render
nice Unicode window titles. It``s not a particularly good
window manager in general, and not a particularly serious
project. But I use it myself, so it can be used, if you``re
sufficiently masochistic. Read the README for more
information. Please, do not send me any mail or complain
about anything until you read the README from the
tarball. It``s packed with FAQs, caveats, and docs. So your
sequence of steps are a) download tarball b) read the README
c) try to compile and/or use - do not reverse b) and c) ;-)
Homepage URL: http://people.redhat.com/~hp/metacity/
The homepage is nothing more than a directory listing of tar.gz/rpm's.
Based on that description, I completely fail to understand why anyone
would think this thing might be replacing Sawfish at any point, much
less in the near future. Give up a cleanly written, elegant, easily
configurable piece of software for a hack someone threw together and
doesn't want to support? Doesn't make any sense.
It looks like the only advantage Metacity has over Sawfish is that it
supports Unicode for window titles. Using GTK to draw frames has got to
be easily duplicable in Sawfish, if that's desired.
Attachment:
pgpYuyLMK7MWc.pgp
Description: PGP signature