Where are the goals of XFCE.
jannis at xfce.org
Sun Jul 13 20:50:41 CEST 2008
Am Sun, 13 Jul 2008 15:34:53 -0300
schrieb "Diego Jacobi" <jacobidiego at gmail.com>:
> > > 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.
Please, go whine somewhere else. Network filesystems are on the TODO
list but you have to respect that Xfce is a hobby project. It's not
sponsored by companies and we're not getting payed to work on it. So
sometimes new features take time.
> > > 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.
Here's what we can expect from users like you: respect. That includes a
less demanding tone in your mails as well. We're not talking business
here, we're talking about voluntary software development. If you
*expect* things from us then you are wrong here.
> > 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.
I've been using 1024x768 ever since. Never noticed that bug you're
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the Xfce