Re: I think we should have a Gnome Window Manager

[Max Watson <redline pdq net delete this>]

At 11:34 AM 2/13/98 +0000, <nuke@bayside.net> wrote:
>On Thu, 12 Feb 1998, Mark Galassi wrote:
>
>> 
>> Guys, it's already been discussed enough, and I think that Marcus
>> would not object to what our consensus is:
>> 
>> We will provide patches to make two or three popular WMs work well
>> with GNOME, thus adding some heightened awareness for those who can
>> handle those two or three WMs.  But we will not require any given
>> window manager.
>> 
>> Marcus should be satisfied with this because it means that one or two
>> WMs will play the role he just proposed (of being a small,
>> configurable, tightly integrated WM).
>
>have we made any suggestions as to which ones to make gnome-able? i
>personally nominate Fvwm[2], Afterstep, and Windowmaker. Enlightenment
>will already follow all gnomeness, so we can focus on some other less
>popular ones as well

IMHO,fvwm2 is a huge mess. Hats off to all the people who successfully
derived a wm from it. I personally will make all the mods needed to icewm.
It IS small, fast, clean, attractive, has theme support similar to E, -but
none of your style, Raster- :) I've already hacked it up to work with gnome
in its current state. (If I could only get icesound working!) Does anyone
use icewm but me? I think it rocks. And what it was missing, panel and
GNOME provide. :) 

M.Watson redline at pdq dot net