Where are the goals of XFCE.

Diego Jacobi jacobidiego at gmail.com
Sun Jul 13 20:34:53 CEST 2008

2008/7/13 Olivier Fourdan <fourdan at gmail.com>:

> Hi,
> On Sun, Jul 13, 2008 at 7:00 AM, Diego Jacobi <jacobidiego at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi. I cant find the real goals of xfce.
> Neither can I find the goals of your posts here.

Man, i am not blaming xfce, not even to you.

> > I know about it of the fast and low resources DE. but it is just a few Mb
> > less than gnome and in some cases i need of nautilus to easily browse on
> my
> > lan by example.
> Fine, you can use Nautilus, dolphin, konqueror, whateverfm...

I can use nautilus, but then whats the point of thunar being so good?
i cant use dolphin or konqueror, why would i choose a like weight DE and
open heavy KDE apps.
I want to use thunar, but i need it to have features to browse the lan, just
because of that i need to have nautilus.

> > Also it seems like many of the applications takes more memory that what
> it
> > should.
> > Panel applets takes around 10 Mb, the menu button takes 14 and the
> clipman
> > 10.
> And how much of this is shared memory? Do you actually know how to
> measure memory on a modern OS?

I dont, maybe thats why i write "Seems".
I have used the xfce process manager tool to measure it. That value is
How should i measure memory on a modern OS?

> > But a simple application with a systray icon can take less than that.
> > As an example, Engage is much more lightweight and user-friendly.
> Sure, but most of the memory used is shared between gtk+ applications,
> so your argument is valid as long as you run not gtk+ application,
> otherwise the memory is used anyway,

But GTK doesnt takes 9 Mb of 10, as far as i know.

> > At the end it is the samething to have xfce or gnome. I wish to have a
> > better mix between both, like the xfce panel, xfce-menu(with a couple of
> > features more), orage, a desktop like the nautilus one, and thunar using
> > gnome-vfs to browse the LAN.
> Cool, we always need contributors, awaiting your patches :)

Of course, another developer more to duplicate efforts.
I am an electronics student, im sorry if a preffer to develop an
Electronic-IDE and VSM, which seems like no one in the linux world what to
do, except for the crappy projects like gEDA.
Also i  was expecting to get an url with the plans for thunar and seeing
there the lan support, not a joke.

> > Also there is some common features missing like suspend/hibernate support
> on
> > the logout window, right click menu on the main-menu or in the appfinder.
> > There isnt any drag and drop from appfinder to menu-editor, and this
> editor
> > doesnt edit the system menu like alacarte buggilly does.
> Right, the usability of the panel can be improved, that's why we work
> on new versions (with our little resources). But how often do you
> modify your config, honestly? I do it once, and then stick to my
> setup, I seldomly change the panel configuration, so even if it would
> be a good usability feature, it's not necessarily the most important
> one.
> I totally agree with the suspend/hibernate feature. The good thing is
> that there is a patch that is available and used by most fine
> distributions. If you ask me, I would integrate that patch right away,
> but that decisions belongs to Benny.

I know this patch, but if after that, i upgrade, the patch will be removed,
so again, there is no reason to no incorporate it in xfce? or the plans
exists and there is no url to see it.

> > The default size of the xfce control panel is so big that doesnt feet on
> a
> > 800x600 screen computer.
> My foot doesn't fit a 800x600 screen either :)

Nice, you are smart.

> Seriously though,  we
> have to make sensible defaults, but the good thing is that it's
> entirely configurable so you can adapt the size of the panel so it
> fits in the screen.

So that can be configured?, can you tell please where? That "default bug"
exists since like 5 years when i first tryed xfce and was never fixed. Seems
like all the developers always have used big monitors. That is the ugly
conditions of third world contries like my. We always need lightweight. Also
lightweight is a good thing for the energy crisis of all countries.
Wouldnt it be better the control panel to be like the appfinder but only for
configurators. What can i say, i like the appfinder. Also i like gnome-go,
but it is sadly developed in mono.
Also the appfinder seems very similar to the new main-menu approach of some
distros, like the suse one, of kde if i am not wrong.

> > And the appfinder is a great tool, with it, one can work without a panel
> and
> > just the launchers of engage. But appfinder doesnt allows you to do any
> more
> > than launching and shortcuts to xfdesktop. And the default selected
> category
> > (the "all") is the most laggy, so it adds 1 second or 2 to the start of
> it.
> > xfce can not be called lightweight anymore, i really want to see the
> goals
> > and on what improvements is working the xfce team.
> Same question as before, I respect your ideas, opinions and thoughts,
> but I am not sure I understand the goal of your post here.

Sorry but seems like not.

> Maybe you
> should subscribe to the xfce-dev list if you want to have a better
> understanding of what will change in the next coming version...

Thats right, but often developers are bussy developing, and some users are
able to answer some kind of questions.
If there isnt yet any url to get a list of goals for each xfce-app that will
be a very good thing to have.

I was going to post it in the forum, but there isnt too much activity there.

> Cheers,
> Olivier.
> _______________________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.xfce.org/pipermail/xfce/attachments/20080713/53e7777a/attachment.html>

More information about the Xfce mailing list