%% Mikhael Goikhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Are we still speaking of the examples?
mg> I am speaking about the patch of 1.2Mb that you apply. Maybe a good way forward would be for someone to go through the 1.2M patch and give a concise bullet list of all the changes that it makes. Then we can have a bullet-by-bullet discussion about whether each is appropriate or not, in the new FVWM. It seems that the FVWM Debian package is suffering from some bitrot, where the Debian-specific parts haven't always been modified to reflect enhancements in the base package. As an example I agree with Mikhael that there shouldn't be a system-wide default fvwm config: Dan's excellent work to bring up a configurator for new FVWM users shouldn't be hidden by years-old crusty configuration files. Let's get the list of changes, then we can all decide how to create the best possible package for both Debian users and FVWM developers. I've had a lot of good experiences with Manoj as the Debian maintainer of GNU make so I feel confident we can work together just as amicably for FVWM. For DEBs, even moreso than with RPMs, I don't think it's a good idea to have two very different setups: it just doesn't make sense in the Debian world. If we can get the "official" DEB setup, or very close to it, into the FVWM release tarball that would be most excellent. Should we move this discussion to the fvwm-workers list? -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul D. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> HASMAT--HA Software Mthds & Tools "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These are my opinions---Nortel Networks takes no responsibility for them. -- Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL: http://www.fvwm.org/>. To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
