On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 5:12 AM, David Bjergaard <dbjerga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Anyway, let me know what you guys think. I was very surprised by the suggestion of "no further development" and "In either case, stumpwm would be done." If that's the direction you want to go perhaps a separate thread should be created for discussing that since I'm not particularly interested in utf8 input but I am definitely interested in that topic and I suspect there are others that feel similarly who might have skipped this thread. I'm very grateful for all the work you've done as the maintainer/developer. I can understand if you're not interested in further development but only bug fixes. I assume by freeze you mean of features others implement not just that you don't personally plan to implement new features. Perhaps though it would be still worthwhile to have people submitting pull requests for new features and just accept them to an unstable branch or make it clear that you're waiting for a new maintainer to step up for new features to be merged, and see if anyone wants to take over that part of stumpwm. It would be a shame for people to have the idea that stumpwm is finished or to miss out on receiving pull requests if in a year someone steps up to continue development. I think making the freeze conditional (on a new maintainer) or temporary is better than declaring the project is done. I agree a new wm (or major revision of stumpwm) with a layer of separation from the underlying windowing system is very exciting and I look forward to it. I can totally understand if you want to use more of your personal time in that area. But let's not kill enthusiasm for improving the project we currently have for something that may or may not exist in the future. Scott
_______________________________________________ Stumpwm-devel mailing list Stumpwm-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel
