A little shadow patch ...

Nikolas Arend Nikolas.Arend at gmx.net
Fri Nov 12 00:43:48 CET 2004

Olivier Fourdan wrote:

>On Thu, 2004-11-11 at 23:56 +0100, Nikolas Arend wrote:
>>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.
>Because that makes the gui bloated. A gui with an option for everything
>and anything is simply confusing and useless.
But first: it would only make the configuration gui bloated, not 
xfce,... and second:
if the configuration management app is organized in a reasonable manner, 
I think
it can be made neither confusing nor useless. If the possibility to 
alter an already
implemented feature is considered useless, wouldn't it be better to not 
have implemented
the feature at all?

>>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.
>But that is not true, user options are by no mean a "delicate subject".
>I am not against all options, but if someone sends a patch that
>implements an option that doesn't fit, I don't see why I would accept
>it. I am just keeping the project in sync with the global vision.
Sorry, but you're missing the point. I don't say user options are 
delicate, I'm talking
about the controlling mechanism of features. I sent in a similar gui 
patch once, but
it was rejected as well, and that's ok. (the "hidden option" is still 
there, which I'm really
thankful for, but I don't expect many unexperienced users to discover it).
What do you mean by "user option" btw? All options are user options in a 
environment, aren't they?

>Again that doesn't mean the option is "bad", but it simply doesn't fit.
What does "not fit" mean? If an option, controlling a certain feature, 
doesn't fit,
the feature should be abandoned at all.

>Every people who sends patch knows that, sometimes patches get accepted
>sometimes not... I am not taking it mainstream, but someone else may
>like it and use it.
Agreed. But I find it hard to maintain a specific feature just for yourself.

My wife says I need to shut down that computer, so I obey ;-)
Sorry I brought that up now, you're definitely busy with releasing 4.2 ...

Good night and all the best,


More information about the Xfce4-dev mailing list