roberts
Group: Members
Posts: 4983
Joined: Oct. 2003 |
 |
Posted: Oct. 09 2007,19:25 |
 |
| Quote (mikshaw @ Oct. 06 2007,12:44) | If we're talking about personal opinions here, I think it would be easier for DSL development if there was simply no wm-specific behaviors included in DSL base. I can think of only a couple of things that might be causing troubles, though...one being the slit in Fluxbox and the other being desktop menus. If both of these compatibility issues were simply ignored and left up to the user (as is the case in most distros anyway), it wouldn't matter what wm was being used. The wm in DSL base could change arbitrarily, or the user could pop in something entirely different, and the only incompatibility issues might be from wm-specific files in the user's backup (again, something I'd consider the user's responsibility).
Ultimately, though, I don't see how developing 2 different DSLs simply for WM choice could be any simpler than the current situation. It would likely be more complicated. |
I actually like the idea of making DSL base smaller by only providing hooks to any window manager. I could start by making jwm and fluxbox both be available as extensions. Having wm extensions write into .desktop. Have .xinitrc 'include' the needed start instructions. Have the extension create any needed menus, from main menu to mydsl and optional menu. Of course the main menu would have to be generated after all autoloaded extensions. This sounds doable and interesting. It would result in a much smaller DSL base. Wouldn't need a wm switcher as you pick the one (wm) that you want.
|
.
DSL Market ,
Great VPS hosting provided by Tektonic
