On 08 Nov 2002 10:25:12 +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote: > > Well, I think we will never agree on this. My foremost goal is > portability. I just can't make myself to see "internet access" > and perl as being available everywhere all the time. People are > struggling with routing, dial in problems and dead links every > day. > > If you think it bloats the tarball and the installation we can > make another cvs module "fvwm-docs" that contains the supporting > documentation.
My point is very clear. If you think fvwm-menu-directory is not portable, you may rewrite it using sh or C. You may even use the same man page as available now. But I don't think installing anything else into bindir that is much less configurable and without documentation is a good thing. I wrote some rules that I would like we follow for files installed into every user's /usr/bin (or similar). These scripts fail on all rules. For me perl in 2002 is a standard unix tool just like awk was in 1990. I don't remember any report saying a user can't use fvwm-menu-* scripts or even fvwm-themes because they don't have perl. So this is a non issue. The programming language is not important for me as long as the mainainer agrees to maintain its script for a long time (that is I am ready to). The functionality and configurability is what is important to me. Regards, Mikhael. -- 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]
