Re: metacity, vte

[textshell neutronstar dyndns org]

On Sun, Sep 22, 2002 at 08:28:41PM -0400, Sean Middleditch wrote:
> On Sun, 2002-09-22 at 20:05, Rui Miguel Seabra wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 22, 2002 at 02:05:58PM -0400, Sean Middleditch wrote:
> > Well, a lot of people [1] do dumb things that bite them in the ass!
> > That does not mean we should put diapers and iron-shirts on everyone.
> > 
> > The kind of users who are like that, don't even grasp that they can make
> > their desktop different, so this is a moot disagreement since they will
> > not change _anything_ at all on 99.99% of the cases. Besides, I think
> > that such a capplet
> 
> You've never worked a support desk, have you?  ~,^  There are way too
> many people who *think* they know what they're doing... Quote: "You
> could set up a super computer with those two old machines!  Ya, I read
> PC Magazine, I know how you techies think."  Same guy didn't understand
> the difference between RAM and hard-disk space.  These are the people
> that are advanced enough to start "customizing" their machines, then
> come complaining to my boss or I because "it just went all weird.  I
> didn't do anything."

That kind of users deserve a locked down desktop anyway ;-).


> > <sarcasm>
> >   I suggest changing to MS Windows if you like integrated holes[2].
> > </sarcasm>
> 
> lol.  Just because MS has a poor implementation of integrated components
> (granted, it's more complete and more mature than either KDE or GNOME
> atm, but nevermind that) doesn't mean all integration sucks.  By
> integration, I'm mostly meaning things like gconf, and simple
> configuration: i.e., instead of a gtk theme capplet and a sawfish theme
> capplet and a metacity theme capplet and etc., just a theme capplet with

Integration is to me everthing plays nice together not "there can be only 
one foo".

> 
> It may perhaps be more fruitful to the users to create a WM that works
> for everyone, instead of saying "if you have these needs use Foo, or
> these needs use Bar."  There shouldn't be any compelling reason to
> change WM's.  Those that just want to be l337 can be 'elite' and use the
> command line (or hell, gconf-editor if they're pansies and the
> window_manager key works) to change it.  So far as *I'm* concerned,
> Metacity is it.  For others, the ones that aren't just complaining about
> the lack of "useless overkill l337 feature X", it would be a better use
> of time to just fix Metacity, instead of worrying how to let users pick
> between multiple broken WM's.

But it seems that Havoc isn't willing to do that with metacity (which is 
his decision, his aim is to stop so called crackrock). So metacity will 
never have all the features some people like, even if they are useful and 
not just patches for bad design.

Martin H.


PS: Ooops last time I wanted to stop posting to the endless debate;-)