On Tue, Nov 09, 1999 at 07:25:19PM -0800, Michael Han wrote:
> It's gone away, but I remember not liking the themes approach that had
> been taken by fvwm.themes.org. First and foremost was the decision to
> locate all the themes stuff in $HOME/fvwm. I think $HOME/.fvwm makes a
> lot more sense. My local CVS tree is in $HOME/fvwm. Next, I didn't
> think it appropriately distinguished between behaviors and themes.
> Things like menu items and bindings could be distributed in a theme.
> That was bad, IMHO.
Anybody remember fvwm2gnome? It seemed to have a fairly clean way of
distributing themes and a nice way of organizing everything. Certainly themes
don't have to support GNOME in any way, but it might be worth taking a look at
for a start.
--
</nathan> | froydnj_at_rose-hulman.edu | http://www.rose-hulman.edu/~froydnj/
Is this *idiocy*? Or something so If the human brain were so simple
brilliant that it just *looks* that we could understand it, we
stupid? --Gary Kasparov would be so simple we couldn't.
--
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 majordomo_at_fvwm.org.
To report problems, send mail to fvwm-owner_at_fvwm.org.
Received on Tue Nov 09 1999 - 21:43:43 GMT