xfce version 3 vs. 4 : missing features?

[Biju Chacko]

On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 08:19:23 -0700 (PDT), Rich Shepard wrote:

>   It's unfortunate that "improvements" cannot be offered as user-configuable
> options rather than hard-wired into the code. Then each of us could
> configure the look-and-feel (has anyone patented that term yet?) and
> functioning to his/her preferred way of working. And each of us could have a
> different configuration.

Well read http://www.ometer.com/free-software-ui.html to find out why
over-configurability is a Bad Thing(TM). We have tried to stick to intelligent
defaults. Occassionally people have convinced us that the default is wrong, in
which case we change the default rather than adding a configuration option.

However, there are alternatives and since we are more standard compliant now the
alternatives should work pretty well. Sawfish is a very configurable WM that
ought to work quite well with XFce4.

>   I've been using xfce for many years now (I can't remember just how many or
> with which version I started). The dropping of features (or change, if you
> prefer) is my only complaint. I've no idea why it's done this way, but it
> would have been nice to have a different philosophy for feature shifts.

We have tried to avoid *dropping* features. Usually the same functionality is
available in a different way. Features which have been dropped are usually:

* Non-compliant with standards
* No longer useful
* On a TODO list to be added in a later release. (And may actually exist in CVS,
like session management)

Hope this helps,

-- b

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Biju 'botsie' Chacko                        biju_chacko at vsnl dot net
http://www.symonds.net/~botsie          Public Key available on request
-----------------------------------------------------------------------