"Jose' Manuel Pereira" <jmp_at_NOdigitais.ist.utl.pt> writes:
>
> Too late. scwm is based on it. I currently have installed one of the first
> releases (0.4, I think) and it is impressively usable & stable.
> (Then again, they started from fvwm-2.0.46...;-)
>
> The authors did what people here are discussing once again:
>
> - Junked the current "interpreter". According to fvwm-list, this is
> a_good_thing.
>
> - Chose Guile (scheme) as the new supporting language. According to
> fvwm-list, this is _evil_, but only for religious reasons. ;-)
Well, I've only suggested that it might be _unwise_ for political reasons.
>
> - Since guile isn't a finished product, every scwm'er has a different
> release/snapshot of it installed. Instead of being an obvious a_ha!
> show-stopper, this looks somehow irrelevant (I installed the old 1.2 guile
> release just for it. The developers use modern snapshots. 1.2 simply worked
> for all scwm versions till now).
>
> - They have a quickly developing new wm. Fvwm stopped at 2.0.46. For good, as
> it seems. No hard feelings, Chuck...
>
> Just one example: the dreaded GSFR is already done. They didn't submit it
> to this list, allegedly because the C code is too different now for a
> patch to be any use to fvwm...
>
> Yes, the Great Style Flags Rewrite. Big deal, uh?
>
> As for CPU/memory weight, didn't notice any difference (no stats done, didn't
> bother) in a P133/32Mb/Linux.
>
> Personally, I just keep using fvwm2. It does the job and I simply don't have
> the time to rewrite the .rc again for another wm (although, using Greg
> Badros' config, now written in scheme, looks strikingly similar to the one I
> picked up for fvwm...)
>
> Other reason is that my python "generic" module just keeps working and I
> became too sentimentally attached to that code... ;-)
Well, this sounds pretty cool to me. I'd wished that I'd heard about it
sooner. I did an altavista search for scwm, but didn't find anything. Ah, just
found it on the guile webpage.
I'd even go so far to say that I think we should release the current fvwm, and
make scwm fvwm version 3. Since scwm looks like what a lot of people would
like fvwm to become, and renaming scwm to fvwm3 would give them instant name
recognition and a large user/tester base, it could be a good thing for
everybody. The only issues would be political (which often are the hardest to
overcome).
--
Brady Montz
bradym_at_cs.arizona.edu
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.hpc.uh.edu/fvwm/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a
message to majordomo_at_hpc.uh.edu.
To report problems, send mail to fvwm-owner_at_hpc.uh.edu.
Received on Tue May 05 1998 - 11:47:20 BST