On Sun, Jul 22, 2001 at 04:59:06AM -0500, Chris Bacott wrote:
> On Sunday 22 July 2001 04:33 pm, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> > On 22-Jul-2001 Chris Bacott wrote:
> > > Or should I just read the source? I want to work on BB, but I can't find
> > > any docs.
> >
> > it is all in the source, no other docs. The good news is the code blackbox
> > code is well named, designed and layed out. bbtools is a little harder to
> > follow but is also fairly easy.
>
> Thanks. It was mentioned above that There is some 'goal' that Jeff and Brad
> want to implement. Exactly what spec are they wanting to implement? I was
> just going to add a few features, port a few apps, etc. I'm coming from Kde,
> and I love the speed of BB, but it lacks a few features and apps that Kde has
> and I need. Yes, I know I can just run Kde apps from BB, but ld has a little
> problem with some aspects of C++, making KDE/QT libs a little slow to load,
> unless they're cached. I'd like to just rewrite parts to make them
> independent of QT.
Well, I have a few goals right now... The spec that will be implemented
is the NET WM Spec; it was ironed out (with much hemming-and-hawing) by
a bunch of the window manager and desktop folks. The purpose is to
provide window manager and app writers with a single common protocol for
doing certain common desktop tasks (like communicating with pagers,
panels, etc). Basically it should let you use blackbox as your wm under
either KDE or Gnome.
My more immediate goal has been changing the core; I was hoping to get
those new classes (but not a full bb snapshot) out to folks by Monday,
but it may take until Wednesday (no time to code tonight). Hopefully
everyone will still think it's as "well-named, designed and layed out"
as the old code.
Oh, and in answer to your original question, yes, the only programming
documentation is the source itself.
Jeff Raven
