Michael Treibton <[email protected]> writes: > On 12 May 2010 11:44, Chris Bannister <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 10:59:25PM +0200, Frédéric Perrin wrote: >>> bijoy: you may be more interested in fvwm2-devel, which sports 2.5.28, >>> than in fvwm2 which has 2.4.20. >> >> Been wondering for a while why you have to alter your config file >> when you upgrade fvwm? That is, after you upgrade fvwm you start getting >> "Deprecated: ... " messages. Doesn't good design mitigate the necessity >> for this. > > i've noticed this as well. what would be nice, if is fvwm can be told > to dump out the config once its read it in and converted over the new > options.
The 2.5.x versions are "officially" betas. If you start using a feature in the beta series, you're not supposed to complain if it changes. When major versions are released, for exampe, 2.2, 2.4 and someday 2.6 conversion scripts are included. > is this possible? then the user wouldn't need to know anythings changed. :) When I install a new major version, I front end the fvwm2 command with a script I write. I track whether the user has ever run the new version. If not, I invoke the conversion script and then send email to the user telling the user what has changed. My point is, admins in multi-user shops know their users and what procedures to follow for a new user. Changing files around is not something I'd hide from my users.
