On Thu, Sep 03, 2020 at 01:27:19PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote: > It's a tricky one. Right now, things have not diverged because I haven't > implemented those changes. I'd always viewed Fvwm3 as being a departure from > Fvwm2 -- and hence any association with it at the moment as being equivalent > is just because it's lacking any breaking changes. It's also an easier > transition for any one wishing to try Fvwm3 who's previously used Fvwm2. > > That's one of the reasons why I went with version 1.0.0 -- Fvwm3 is going to > be separate from Fvwm2 over time, in that I'm not expecting to maintain > compatibility, and I wouldn't therefore want to mislead users with a false > version number. > > There may well be some overlap with Fvwm2 in terms of unchanged file names > (fvwm-config springs to mind), although I think for the most part Fvwm2 and > Fvwm3 can co-exist. I'll try and make the distinction better in future > releases, so that it's easier for package maintainers to allow Fvwm2 and Fvwm3 > to coexist.
The exact same reasoning led to the "fvwm2" project, and it caused a whole lot of useless work to eventually clean up and rename it to fvwm again. The autotools can take care of having two versions installed in parallel (--program-suffix configure option). Distributors know how to use these options. And as far as I understand, nobody is going to maintain the 2.x version anyway. Ciao Dominik ^_^ ^_^ -- Dominik Vogt
