Re: Gnome2 and viewports

[Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com>]

Gregory Merchan <merchan baton phys lsu edu> writes: 
> Except that it doesn't make any sense for workspaces. How do you know
> which workspace you'll land on when you go off a side? You don't
> and shouldn't expect to because workspaces are not contiguous; 

Virtual desktops certainly can be defined to have a geometric
relationship.
 
But if they couldn't, or if you want windows that overlap spaces, that
just means the implementation details of workspaces should match the
implementation details of current viewports, rather than current
virtual desktops. It still does not justify having both
implementations, just changes which implementation you choose.

> According to that page, what GNOME seeks to eliminate is something
> that, "has been long requested by many OSF/Motif users".

Any feature that ever existed in a widely-used GUI will be requested
by lots of users. However making GNOME the union of all features in
all widely-used GUIs would make GNOME suck big time.

Most of the hackers can't even explain the difference between a
viewport vs. a desktop. Given that, it's totally bogus to push this
implementation detail on end users.

Havoc