xfwm4

[Diego Jacobi]

>
> Probably because of better integration, and probably because metacity
> is using "gnome design philosophy".
>

Right.


>
> >> If you feel insulted by me because of comparing xfwm and metacity then
> >> you're wrong. It's not that. It's questioning things in the wrong way.
> >> The basic message of your initial mails was to be interpreted as: "I
> >> thought this was a lightweight desktop - now I prefer openbox - what's
> >> your point in developing Xfce anyway?!"
> >
> > "I'am using openbox now"
>
> So why don't you keep using it? I don't see any issues with that,
> except that maybe in the settings manager the WM configuration doesn't
> show up... I myself used to use xfce with sawfish, and it worked just
> fine (as would using another WM work in gnome).
>

Maybe, but i like xfce and i want it to evolve in the features a like,
obviusly as everybody, and i dont know what are the goals to evolve and if
they include working with xfwm4.
Maybe if i like a cool gnome theme or some simple but useful animations i
can use metacity with xfce. And because they both seems to take the same
resources, would it be wrong (in the sense of lightweight) to do that? use
metacity with xfce? I couldnt know without technical details.
OpenBox is nice but isnt written with gtk, so isnt as much pretty, and adds
more libs to the shared memory, if i am not wrong.


> > Because i want a very lightweight WM and a simple minimizing animation,
> > which xfwm4 seems to not fit in. xfce is better than gnome respecting to
> > programming philosophy, but is not lightweight to me.
> > But i was comparing xfwm4 with metacity because the last is the WM of a
> > heavy desktop and the first the WM of a light desktop and but are very
> > similar. So why doesnt the heavy desktop use the lighter alternative if
> it
> > is equal or better?
>
> Hm, so given the arguments in this email, why are you asking this
> question to the xfce group, and not to the gnome people? They are free
> to choose whatever WM they want, and they have switched in the past
> (at some point sawfish was their default WM).
>

Because i didnt know that xfwm4 is better than metacity, for me at the
moment of writing they are both equal, with xfwm4 having less resources for
animations, but maybe the problems that i am having can be bugs.



> >> And if that's what arrives at the other end then you've definitely hit
> >> the wrong tone, don't you think?
> >
> > Of course, but this is a reason to leverage the tone?
> > Not answering would be a better answer.
>
> By the same note, people can respond to you "better not to ask, than
> to ask in the wrong tone". Keep in mind that most people develop these
> programs in their spare time, for fun and nothing else.
>

Yep but at my side and at that moment, i have asked right. So why shouldnt i
ask a right question?
Badly or aggressively answering a wrong question is different.
You can easily see that my english is not perfect, not even correct, so dont
you have in mind that i can possible be saying something incorrectly but
with good intentions?
After all, how many people spend time in subscribe to a list to blame it for
fun? That would be insane. And for me is the less possible side of
interpretation.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.xfce.org/pipermail/xfce/attachments/20080713/13a77ae9/attachment.html>