WM's (was: Default window manager)

>: > Why don't just replace enlightenment with another wm?
> Not to belittle the merit of this discussion, but isn't this a Redhat
> issue and not a GNOME issue? _No_ WM is considered part of the GNOME
> "core" bundle, right? Is there a Redhat forum where the discussion might
> find a better fit?

	You are correct, this is a Redhat issue, not a Gnome issue.

	However, this discussion closely relates to a thread from one or
two months ago about having a "Gnome" window manager.  The problem with
window managers is that their own built-in features (such as pagers,
background-setting tools, sound utilities, minimized icons, and built-in
wharfs) conflict with the Gnome features, and thus provide a confusing and
incosistent user interface to the enduser.  For example, some window
managers use a scripted interface to use xv to set the background.  
Suddenly that component of the Gnome configuration utility is rendered
useless, and user wonder's why his background won't change.

	I suggest anyone interested in this issue check out the Gnome
window manager compliance mailing list, and post suggestions to Redhat
about defaulting to another WM that can be pre-configured to have all its
conflicting/confusing features turned off.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]