A little shadow patch ...

[Nikolas Arend]

Olivier Fourdan wrote:

>Hi,
>
>On Thu, 2004-11-11 at 23:18 +0100, Nikolas Arend wrote:
>  
>
>>But since a declared goal of xfce is to
>>be a choice for a broader audience (please correct my if I'm wrong),
>>    
>>
>
>Oh, yeah you are wrong. Adding every option that comes to mind is
>definitely not the goal of this 8 year old project. The goal is to
>implement a desktop that is lighter, faster and better.
>
>  
>
I think you got me wrong. I don't see why a configuration option is 
making xfce
heavier, slower and worse if the feature it is configuring is already 
implemented. The
feature is what makes xfce bloated, not the way it can be controlled.

>>that configuration policy, especially when there a volunteers willing to 
>>send patches.
>>    
>>
>
>It's always a good idea to ask before coding. But still, this patch is
>not going mainstream, that doesn't mean that it is useless for
>everybody. 
>
>  
>
Of course, but if you signal everyone that patches concerning the 
configuration stuff are
a very delicate subject and have barely a chance to be accepted, the 
movivation is probably
low.

>And why on earth should I accept every single patch that comes around
>for the simple reason that someone was kind enough to code?
>
>  
>
That has absolutely nothing to do with what I was talking about. As I 
said, you guys make
the decision and no one wants to question that.

>Cheers,
>Olivier.
>
>  
>

Nick.