Re: GNOME Window Manager
- From: mawarkus t-online de (Matthias Warkus)
- To: gnome-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: GNOME Window Manager
- Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 04:45:20 +0200
+++ Wed, May 30, 2001 at 09:44:15PM -0400 +++
Sean Middleditch e-mails me. Film at 11. Reply right now, after the break.
> On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 01:32:38PM +0200, Matthias Warkus wrote:
> > +++ Tue, May 29, 2001 at 06:54:30PM -0700 +++
> > Lion Kimbro e-mails me. Film at 11. Reply right now, after the break.
> > >
> > > Mawarkus,
> > >
> > > Well, here's more evidence that people get pretty emotional about their
> > > window managers..!
> > Not really.
> > > When I say that it should be invisible, I mean that the user should almost
> > > never see any reference or evidence of something called a Window Manager
> > > even existing.
> > What would be the benefit?
> You really don't have much experience with the average user, do you?
Oh, I do. My father is pretty average. On my last summer job I worked
a tech support line from time to time, too. I had someone complaining
his computer had crashed when all that had happened was that he had
pulled the plug, trying to find an outlet to plug his desk lamp in.
> Most people that use computers don't care a crap about how they
> work, why they work, only that they *do* work. Workplaces have
> training seminars on the basics of Microsoft Word for crying out
> If a user has to, for any reason, mess with any internal workings of
> the desktop environment, they're usually screwed. People are often
> intelligent and resourceful when it comes to their jobs, but most of
> them are frigging useless morons when it comes to computers.
Please spare me that sermon. Having to read this every week on
comp.os.linux.advocacy didn't make it any more right than your
> But, seriously, let's go back to the key bindings, one my biggest
> annoyances about GNOME. The WM *does* need to handle things like
> closing Windows, etc. GNOME (panel, whatever) needs to handle
> menu-open requests. The desktop-manager needs to handle the
> selecting/manipulating of desktop icons. So we have, what, 3
> programs to configure key bindings for? Well, GNOME+Nautilus
> handles two of them, hopefully a common configuration system can be
> thought up for that. But what about the WM? How in the Nine Hells
> are you supposed to merge the configuration controls for GNOME and
> WindowMaker, or AfterStep, or even Sawfish? Well, you **aren't**
> supposed to merge them.
There should be a central table of keybindings and a way for
applications to negotiate them. No big deal, it just needs
> Besides, a true GNOME-only WM would offer a lot of benefits besides
> configuration. Common look and feel, for example. Every WM I've
> seen, Sawfish included, doesn't fit in with GNOME so far as its
> dialogs (which a basic WM shouldn't be using that often, but still)
> are concerned. And every WM offers functionality that duplicates
> some of the GNOME desktops, in even slight ways.
Does this justify writing Yet Another Window Manager?
So if you know exactly what needs to get done, go ahead! Stop
complaining and get coding.
> ... My Gods, that was a long rant. ^,^
Yes. The lack of line wrapping makes it seem even longer.
> Seriously, there is *nothing* wrong with any of the WM's out there.
> They just shouldn't be an integral part of GNOME.
You leave me puzzled. If that is not what you and Lion want, what is
Go forth, be fruitful and fork()!
] [Thread Prev