Re: E and GNOME not the right way?

[James Henstridge <james daa com au>]

Just on the note of E and GNOME not being compatible, I don't know if you
have noticed, but E is one of the most configurable window managers in
existance.  Just because its core has features that overlap with gnome's
does not mean they can't be turned off (I would not expect Raster and
Mandrake to start hard coding things now).

In fact, it will probably be entirely possible to create a theme(s) that
turn some features off by default to make it `gnome friendly'.  There is
nothing to stop people distributing binaries of E with one of these themes
set to the default (in RH6, they set the default theme to something a
little more conservative for instance).

It should not be a problem for people who want to use E and GNOME.

James.

--
Email: james@daa.com.au
WWW:   http://www.daa.com.au/~james/


On Wed, 30 Jun 1999, Ali Abdin wrote:

> I was wondering what the GNOME community thinks about this quote from
> Raster on Slashdot.
> 
> "E is not part of the gnome project thus it clashes in several departments
> and will continue to do so"
> 
> I understand that E's development team has an agenda that is not parallel
> with GNOME, and I respect that completely. I was wondering, what does this
> mean for GNOME and I have a couple of notes to make.
> 
> 1.) It appears RedHat is trying to make GNOME the default Window Manager
> for GNOME. This will not be feasible due to the way they will clash (E will
> eventually handle the desktop too if you don't know).  This will
> POTENTIALLY negatively effect GNOME if RedHat continues this way - There
> are many clashes alreayd with GNOME and E (i.e. right-clicking on your
> desktop would bring up an E and GMC menu). Any ideas on this?