Eric Hanson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> Modular? How in any sense of the word is blackbox currently modular?
Simple, you want some feature such as a graphical pager, you get that app
and run it. In almost all aspects BB allows you to add what you want (the
slit being the only exception I'm aware of).
> How about the fact that blackbox listens and grabs certain
> keys (alt+(right or left click)) even though it doesn't let you modify
> this behavior?
I'm not aware of the current version of BB grabbing any keystrokes of any
kind. Please elaborate on this.
> I like blackbox alot. It is a great WM, however it should
> either handle all keycode and butten events or none of them.
It should handle none of them in my opinion and let bbkeys or some other app
perform this task.
> Other programs should be able to integrated into blackbox at compile
> time.
I see no need for this. Why place the option at compile time when it
doesn't need to be there? Keeping it as an external application will let
people use or not use the application at will rather than forcing them to
compile in an option they may not use or recompile to gain an option.
> I hope this doesn't sound too harsh but from reading this list, some
> people are confusing minimalistic and modular with the attitude 'I like
> it this way and it shouldn't change cause I would have to change too'.
I think your reading too much into peoples posts. I simply don't see a need
to have these options compiled into BB rather than having them as external
applications. In what was does having them external hinder the application?
Until something of this nature is pointed out I just can't see a good reason
to move them into BB.
Jamin W. Collins
