Re: FVWM: The Future of fvwm Development

2016-11-15 Thread Harald Dunkel 
On 11/12/2016 07:59 AM, Marco Maggi wrote:
> 
>   I  do not  follow the  devel  mailing list.   There is  a single  very
> selfish request  I have: continue to  allow fvwm to fully  configure the
> use of the  keyboard (I have fvwm intercept the  function keys (F1, ...)
> to do stuff for me, and it is my killer feature).
> 

I would second that, but my 3 top level wishlist items would be:

- please don't make the taskbar mandatory
- please don't make dbus mandatory
- keep it simple

Sorry to say, but in the last few years I have seen so many valuable
projects making a turn into a weird direction. I wouldn't like to see
this happen to fvwm.


Regards
Harri

Re: FVWM: The Future of fvwm Development

2016-11-11 Thread Marco Maggi 
Thomas Adam wrote:

> For those of you who follow fvwm-workers@ may already know some of this, but
> for those of you who don't, it's worth mentioning what the state of fvwm
> development holds for the future.

I am a long time fvwm user, and I have not touched my ".fvwmrc" in years
because it just works.  Despite that: IMHO it is fine to move forward.

  I  do not  follow the  devel  mailing list.   There is  a single  very
selfish request  I have: continue to  allow fvwm to fully  configure the
use of the  keyboard (I have fvwm intercept the  function keys (F1, ...)
to do stuff for me, and it is my killer feature).

  One thing  I have desired in  the past is a  more flexible, structured
and clean  format for  the configuration  file.  I do  not like  to push
people into doing work, but what  about using an extension language?  Is
Lua core small enough?

  Thanks for all the work on fvwm.
-- 
Marco