On 31 May 2016 9:31 p.m., "Thomas Funk" <t.f...@web.de> wrote:
>
> On 05/31/2016 09:30 PM, Thomas Adam wrote:
>
>>
>> On 19 May 2016 4:18 p.m., "Thomas Adam" <tho...@fvwm.org <mailto:
tho...@fvwm.org>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hey all,
>> >
>> > The last time this came up for conversation [0] things were far from
ideal. I
>> > want to have another conversation about this to see whether it's
possible to
>> > state the case why some modules in FVWM should be removed.
>>
>> Anyone?
>>
>> Thomas Adam
>>
> Perhaps you shouldn't remove FvwmTaskBar for the moment until someone
creates a replacement
> with FvwmPager/FvwmIconman.
It's already present in the form of FvwmButtons and FvwmIconMan. There's
nothing to do, other than to point people at relevant implementations.
Fvwm-{themes,crystal} notwithstanding, and this is not a reason to delay
such a thing.
No one has been able to assess the impact of this, and hence I'd say, the
loss of FvwmTaskbar is not going to be missed. Even if were, it's still
easily mitigated.
Thomas Adam
> All others (FvwmDragWell, FvwmGTK, FvwmIconBox, FvwmSave / FvwmSaveDesk,
FvwmTheme, FvwmWharf,
> FvwmWinList, FvwmTabs, FvwmWindowMenu) should be removed if code is
broken, deprecated or
> replaceable.
>
>
> -- Thomas --
>
> --
> --
> "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not
sure about the the universe." -- Albert Einstein
>
