Re: First impressions - USER report

[Max <redline pdq net>]

At 11:04 PM 5/10/98 -0400, Elliot Lee  wrote:
>On Sun, 10 May 1998, George wrote:
>
>> I think we'll end up suggesting icewm
>
>"Suggesting" will be taken as "we only really need to make the effort to
>make it work with icewm" instead of doing the patches for other window
>managers.
>
>There was a reason one of the original GNOME goals was wm independance. 
>It's because we need to give people the choice :-) I noticed someone else
>just posted saying they would like the hints for WindowMaker. Is there
>anything else you would like to know to convince you that
>total wm-independance is good? :)
>
>> as it seems it will implement nice hints
>
>So will other window managers, and probably before icewm.
>


>I personally don't like icewm, so please, I don't want people shoving it
>down my throat in order to get full GNOME functionality. :)
>
>When window managers come out with support for hints that are needed by
>GNOME apps, we *will* need a page listing GNOME-compliant window managers.
>Just not one preferred one :)

Ack. Let's not do this again. This is all moot. There are enough wm zealots
around here to guarantee that everyone's favorite wm will get the
GNOMEification it deserves. I've seen at least three wm maintainers post
regularly to the GNOME lists. :) It is important that GNOME stay window
manager independent. This should not be a problem.
I think the GNOME FAQ Section 2.7
<http://www.mindspring.com/~tlewis/gnome/faq/FAQ-2.html#ss2.7> sums it up
pretty well. Maybe a little bit about the window manager issue could be put
into the new GNOME user guide stuff available in the help browser? Which I
love now that the button-links are gone, BTW. :)




M.Watson <redline@pdq.net>
Simulation. Do not drive in ocean.