Re: Some general facts about panel and gnome

["David B. Lounsberry (Dave)" <dlounsberry kc rr com>]

Hassan Aurag wrote:
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> 
> On 1/14/00, 3:05:19 PM, Chris Jones <chris@black-sun.co.uk> wrote
> regarding Re: Some general facts about panel and gnome:
> 
> > Hi
> 
> > Hassan Aurag <aurag@crm.umontreal.ca> wrote:
> > >
> > >  Then ditch Enlightenment!
> > >  That has always been my position.
> 
> > Why can't the GNOME project take a windowmanager-agnostic position?
> Give
> > people a list of the ones that work and are compliant and then let
> them
> > choose rather than specifically recommending one.
> 
>  This is not even an issue afaik. But we need to make sure one window
> manager will always be compliant. E (my favorite wm btw) is not fully!
> 
>  So the thing is not to impose a window manager but rather to have one
> for sure! Of course, any other window managers can comply if they
> wish!
> 
>  Say, what if all window managers started not to comply with gnome? So
> we have a nice panel but no WM????
> 
>  No we need one fully-compliant wm and make sure it stays that way!
> 
> > >  Even though I still prefer Enlightenment over Sawmill (for Fx
> reasons),
> > > I say ditch them if they are not going to be 100% gnome compatible!
> 
> > I don't think that either Raster or Mandrake have said that they don't
> > intend to remain compliant with the GNOME WM spec - they put quite a bit of
> > effort into 0.16 to make it KDE compliant too.
> 
> Good then, but they are not compliant. I can see it on my desktop.
> But maybe it's Gnome and not E. I don't know or care. I just want to
> have for sure a fully-compliant window manager for gnome that I can
> use! I want to use Gnome as desktop!

Everyone here, I am sure, wants a fully GNOME compliant window manager.
But that is not the whole issue as far as I am concerned. 

How does Enlightenment and other window managers intergrate with GTK and
it's themes? The only ones that integrate GTK widgets and themes are
sawmill and wmg. The others require their own themes. If you find a good
E theme you either have to find a matching GTK theme or live with the
mismatch. If we want a consistent look and feel to the desktop, GTK
integration is a must IMHO. 

It's kind of odd that so much work went into making E work well with
KDE, bugs included, but when someone asks if they could stop E from
overlaying the GNOME panel, that person is told that E code will *never*
treat a panel any different than another window. I think we have a
conflict of directions like someone previously mentioned. Thats just
fine with me. 
 
> > Personally, I have no desire to use anything other than Enlightenment unless
> 
> Neither do I! So these little compliance problems should disappear!
> I will personnally start submitting bug reports to E and Gnome about
> all those little weird things!

I did the same thing a while back to the E folks and got a rude
awakening. Hopefully you will have better luck. :-)
Not much GNOME can do about a non compliant windowmanager playing by
their own rules. 

> > the others get a lot better, so I would be fairly annoyed if GNOME 2
> > demanded sawmill as a dependancy. I would be similarly annoyed if E
> > wasn't compliant though.
> 
>  That isn't even an issue for me. I don't another KDE, I want Gnome!
> But I want to make sure we have ONE FULLY COMPLIANT WINDOW MANAGER
> AVAILABLE!
> 
Agreed. I think we can still keep the door open for other window
managers but I think the default GNOME distribution should have only
GNOME/GTK compliant window mangers. 

Just my 2 cents. 

---
Dave Lounsberry

EMAIL: dlounsberry@kc.rr.com
HomePage: http://home.kc.rr.com/dlounsberry