4.4 ETA?

[Brian J. Tarricone]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 12/5/2005 5:16 AM, Jani Monoses wrote:
>>Benny's xfdesktop:
>>
>>* Has a more-or-less fd.o-compliant menu system.
>>
>>Official xfdesktop:
>>
>>* Creates the menu similar to how fd.o suggests, but does not use menu
>>files as specified by the spec.  The menus end up being a bit different
>>in practice.
>
> So according to you recent mail you think Benny's xfdesktop has it
> better here and you wouldn't mind patches to change yours to behave
> similarly?

No, I think mine is "better".  I wrote it and tuned it to produce a menu
structure that I personally like.  Since I've heard very few complaints,
I can only assume that most people agree.  It's very configurable, and
can be tuned by editing an XML file, though I'll admit I haven't
personally tested all that heavily the configurations I don't use.

Benny's supports the fd.o menu standard (almost completely, IIRC) much
better than mine does.  While standards compliance is an admirable goal
in some instances, that fact alone doesn't make either implementation
"better" by any objective means.

I'll accept patches to integrate Benny's menu system with my xfdesktop,
but I'd likely have to do a bit of customisation work to tune it how I
like it for the default menu setup.  I'm not sure how difficult or easy
this will be, as I haven't looked at it.  If no one gets around to
working on this, no problem; the current menu system works plenty well
enough for 4.4.

Setting aside the menu issues for a moment, I also believe mine is
"better" due to the extra functionality.  Again: subjective comparison.

	-brian

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFDlJ/h6XyW6VEeAnsRApdUAJ9H022GL0fQ24Ztga/hJXDgt2ftfQCfdjNg
gL+O2WTTSeABXI3MSjUTzIY=
=tkNW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----