Re: Work in Progress: draft 1.9a

[Dominik Vogt <dominik vogt fvwm org>]

On Tue, Jul 06, 1999 at 06:03:41PM +0200, ettrich@troll.no wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Jul 1999, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > > 
> > > I would go further and say that the application should not request any state
> > > beyond visible/iconified/hidden. The rest is up to the user.
> > > 
> > 
> > I agree. 
> 
> The user requests these things through the application. For example a "startup
> maximize" option in a preference dialog.
> 
> Again: we are talking hints here. If a window manager is broken in that
> respect, people will simply not use it. Except those who just run Netscape and
> a bunch of xterms, but that's surely not the kind of users we are talking about
> here.
> 
> I'm really getting tired of this kind of fundamental discussion. The percentage
> of users, especially new Linux users, using KDE or Gnome should be enough of a
> proof.

Well, if there are reasons for having such hints, simply speak them
aloud. I don't know how many of us have participated in these
'fundamental discussions' you mention, but please don't put everyone
in the same bucket.

There are reasons for and against such hints. The major concern of
the people opposing this kind of hints is complexity and the danger
of applications not behaving well. I guess the X developers saw the
same problem and thus invented the 'user specified' flags for the
various hints. So why don't we do it the same way here.

The other concern several of us share is why it should be possible
to enforce these hints even *after* the WM has taken over control.
I still see no real use with this, only problems.

Bye

Dominik ^_^

-- 
Dominik Vogt, Hewlett-Packard GmbH, Dept. BVS
Herrenberger Str.130, 71034 Boeblingen, Germany
phone: 07031/14-4596, fax: 07031/14-3883, dominik_vogt@hp.com