Tim Tassonis wrote: > Still, a "simple" file manager, as thunar is supposed to be, should work > with files, as provided by the operating system vfs interface. I think > the FUSE approach is the right one, it is not the job of a simple > filemanager to provide a separate, better vfs layer. I hope xfce4 is not > turning into an alternative GNOME/KDE beast and thunar not into > nautilus/konqueror because GNOME/KDE already exist. I always thought > xfce is supposed to be an alternative for people that like to do without > all that additional, costly stuff. A separate vfs layer certainly would > go into that direction.
Well, in xfce we've never followed the approach of "avoid features in order to avoid bloat". Fluxbox et al do a better job of that approach anyway. I think our approach has always been "balance features and bloat and always do it the *right* way" It has worked well thus far and hopefully will continue to do so. -- b _______________________________________________ Thunar-dev mailing list [email protected] http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/thunar-dev
