Re: xscreensaver capplet.

[Jamie Zawinski <jwz jwz org>]

Chema Celorio wrote:
> 
> Looking at xscreensaver-demo gave me the impression that it is not
> serving the same objectives as the capplet.

Nonsense.  They have exactly the same goal: configure the screen saver.

> I am assuming that you don't want your xscreensaver-demo to depend on
> libcapplet.

It already links with -lcapplet when GNOME is available at compile-time.
That's how it integrates into the control panel.

I use configure and #ifdef liberally; if the system has only GTK but not
GNOME, then it notices this and doesn't bother including control-panel
support.

> ok, this was not a typo, great way to start communication. Why am i
> loosing my time with you ? So I will only respond to the most important
> point after this.

Your OWN SOURCE CODE calls them crapplets.  I suggest you become better
informed before you start bitching at me about terminology I didn't
invent.  I also suggest you not be so thin-skinned if you ever want to
get anything done in the hacker community.

I refer you to http://cvs.gnome.org/lxr/search?string=crapplet

> Yes, i think the UI sucks.

(You used the word "sucks"!  I suppose if I were you, I'd start
bitching about your "unprofessionalism" now.)

> It has too many options that a normal mortal
> user does not need to deal with.

As I already said, I'm open to the idea of having an "expert"
tab/switch/whatever to hide some of the options.

> For example. I don't think the user cares about :
> 
> * "gltext -text "%A%n%d %b %Y%n%r" -root"
> * "xearth -nofork -nostars -ncolors 50 -night 3 -wait 0 -timewarp 400.0
> -pos sunrel/38/-30"

If you read my previous mail, you would have seen that I *already*
mentioned these as things that I agree could be removed.

> * "Display subprocess errors"

This controls whether display modes will splat their errors on the
screen over the graphics, or throw them away.  The alternative is
for hacks that have errors to just do nothing: black screen.  
Perhaps it should have a different name, but I think it's a 
legitimate user option.  Some programs (not mine, but other programs
that can integrate into xscreensaver) are noisy, so you might want to
turn this off if you use those.  But, that also throws away all error
messages, so it's a trade-off.

> * "Kill daemon"

This means "stop saving the screen."  It's an absolutely necessary
option.  However, if you have a suggestion for better words to
describe it, that's fine.

> * "Install colormap", does he konw what a color map is ?

Whether they know what it is or not, if this option is un-grayed,
they *have* a colormap, and so they'd better know what it is!
Because otherwise they're going to be confuseda about why their
colors look like hell.  I wish we didn't have to have this option,
just like I wish we didn't have to have the Visual option, but
the fact is that X Windows itself dumps a whole lot of useless
crap on the user.  It requires them to understand things that no
mere mortal should need to understand.  This option exists because
X sucks.

> I have some questions :
> 
> - Are you willing to remove a number of features from your demo program?

I am willing to add an "expert" mode of some kind that hides certain
features/options.

> - Who will it integreate with our archiver so that we can do
> location-managent ?

I have no idea, because I don't know what your archiver is, or what
you mean by "location management."  Can you explain?

-- 
Jamie Zawinski
jwz jwz org             http://www.jwz.org/
jwz dnalounge com       http://www.dnalounge.com/