A little shadow patch ...

[Nikolas Arend]

Auke Kok wrote:

> Olivier Fourdan wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 2004-11-12 at 00:59 +0100, Nikolas Arend wrote:
>>  
>>
>>>> Oh, yeah you are wrong.
>>>>     
>>>
>>> So xfce is not meant for a broader audience? Pity, 'cause I think 
>>> you have a good chance to show everybody that an intelligent desktop 
>>> implementation can be both rich of features that really matter and 
>>> lightweight and stable as well. Unlike some well known OS for the 
>>> i386 architecture.
>>>   
>>
>>
>> Please read my statement again, I did not say I was against a broader
>> audience, I said it's definitely not the initial goal, and it's still
>> not the goal ("being a choice for a broader audience" would be a
>> meaningless goal IMO)
>>
>
> exactly!
>
> This is why I suggested that this type of 'tweak' goes into a separate 
> settings manager plugin. If that is technically possible (for another 
> 3rd-party to modify xfwm4 behaviour somehow) it would provide other 
> people the ability to add fluff and wrap that in a separate package.
>
> It would benefit the modularity and cleanness of xfce IMO, and it 
> would allow 3rd parties to provide functionality which some of us 
> might appreciate, without touching (too much) on the core xfce 
> libs/xfwm4.
>
> Olivier, do you think this would be a viable alternative?
>

I think in principle that would be a good idea. But I'd like to 
emphasize once more that my point was not to add
new features/functionality to xfce/xfwm4 but only a settings mechanism 
that is capable of controlling the already
implemented features ("hidden options") in a more convenient manner, 
making them available for those newbies
that don't like editing rc files or even don't know about some of xfce's 
capabilities.
As Auke said, it could be in form of a plugin for the settings manager, 
maybe s.th. like "Xfce's hidden options"
or "Very advanced settings", whatever,  and be maintained as a separate 
package, like the lil' star iconbox or the
mixer plugin.


Nick.