Olivier Chapuis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > First, I am an fvwm developers. The main developer, Dominik Vogt > is on the wm-spec list I think. Moreover, Matthias Clasen which > is (was?) a fvwm workers (but not fvwm code active at the present > time) is on the list too.
OK, sorry - from your mail I got the impression important developers weren't on there. I know Dominik and Matthias are on the list. > For the fvwm workers: > I try to convince the wm-spec list to add a new ewmh state > (already proposed by Havoc Pennington) to solve the problem > in virtual.c (see the mail by Dominik with the subject > "HAVE_EWMH in virtual.c"). Dominik, reading: http://www.hpc.uh.edu/fvwm/archive/0111/msg00266.html We can't just ignore EWMH; stuff won't work. Window managers MUST be consistent on the meaning of IconicState. So please argue with Sasha and Raster on wm-spec-list. ;-) The whole point of EWMH is to clarify issues like this so that desktops and apps can get predictable behavior from window managers. I think being inconsistent between window managers is worse than either of the possible decisions we could make. Apps can work with either decision, but they can't work if some window managers do it one way and others do it a different way. We haven't actually released an EWMH spec with a clear answer on this topic, so we can still get it right. Havoc -- Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>. To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
