Re: gnome needs a solid, configurable wm

[Elliot Lee <sopwith redhat com>]

On Mon, 29 Nov 1999, Martin Brown wrote:

> I really don't want to use KDE, really I don't...
> 
> I have installed october gnome and the latest Enlightenment, and E is
> a huge disappointment.  Compared to the configurability of KDE, it
> leaves alot to be desired.  This is not to say that there isn't a
> place for E and its tons of eye candy.  It just shouldn't be the
> default wm.

> I find it hard to believe that the gnome people would spend so much time
> creating a wonderful product, that depends totally on the independent work
> of others.  Hard to imagine that a automobile manufacturer would build a
> car without a engine.

Hard to imagine that a car manufacturer would build a car with the garage
included.:)

> Knowing what the gnome programmers know about gnome, how long would it
> take them to create a solid, configurable wm.  A week or two, or
> three?
>
> I have also tried the latest version of Icewm, but gnome complained
> right off the bat that it wasn't gnome compliant, or some such.  I see
> that someone on the list wrote that the latest version of FVWM might
> make a good fit.  I'll check it out.

I use icewm without any problems. Others like sawmill, or WindowMaker, or
whatever.

You may just need to explore the existing options more.

-- Elliot
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.