Thomas Adam writes: > > > A user interested in learning about something as basic and central as > > initialization should not need to root thru mailing list archives. > > On the contrary -- there's many bits and pieces of information which gets > mentioned which simply never makes it into the man page; either because it's > too specific to a given problem, or more likely than this no one sends in a > patch to include it in the man page. >
Not sure why you say "on the contrary", since the above supports rather than contradicts what I said: You rue that "no one sends in a patch to include it in the man page", which is essentially agreeing with my view that widely- relevant initialization info ought to be in the man page. > > I'll be interested to see what you come up with. > I'll probably take this on over the next few weekends and submit a patch that will redact both INITIALIZATION and CONFIGURATION sections, and also address typos and grammar issues throughout as well. I'll undoubtedly have questions; would you prefer that I submit them here or to fvwm-workers list? > > Ah -- I misremembered then. Looking at the history, yes, 2.6.1 always > unconditionally runs fvwm-menu-desktop. In CVS, this was changed to not > do this. > > You'll have to use branch-2_6 anyway if you were serious about this > documentation patch, so please just use that version of FVWM and your > problem will go away. > I'll pick up branch-2_6 when I start to work on the doc update. Btw, as an aside: Out of curiosity, I picked up the latest main branch head snapshot (fvwm-snap-20110724) thinking that perhaps it might also have this fix, but it evidently does not (fvwm.c is identical to 2.6.1). This makes me wonder: Roughly how often are branch-2_6 updates being merged into the main branch?
