new dev branch stuff
Brian J. Tarricone
bjt23 at cornell.edu
Wed Jan 19 10:26:54 CET 2005
Jasper Huijsmans wrote:
>That's the easy stuff, now the rest.
>We have utilities and scripts and user documentation. One thing we could
>do is combine them all into xfce-utils, but perhaps that would be a bit
>xfce4-toys should go. The tips can go in xfce-utils and xfce4-eyes-plugin can
>be moved to xfce-goodies. xfce4-trigger-launcher I think should go to
>xfce-goodies as well.
meh. before reading this last paragraph, i went and typed exactly what
you said, and then noticed that there. agreed. in addition, maybe
rename xfce-utils to xfce4-desktop? esp considering that it's kinda a
"meta-package" with the GDM/xdm scripts in there. i kinda don't like it
being xfce- rather than xfce4-.
>xfce4-terminal, hmm, difficult, do we want to compete with Terminal?
well, if we're going to include Terminal, we need to depend on d-bus.
well, we don't strictly *have* to, since benny said he'll make d-bus
optional, but i think the d-bus part is one of Terminal's distinguishing
features - the ability to run only one instance. benny's put a lot of
time and thought into Terminal. not to say that isn't the same for
eduard and xfce4-terminal, but i think benny's had a bit more time to
work on his, and it's a bit more mature. it's of course up to eduard if
he wants to keep working on xfce4-terminal.
>xfce4-mixer and xfprint both could be separate modules.
yeah - they're outer-core desktop components, but are apps in their own
>xfcalendar needs a new or additional maintainer and should be part of
>xfce-utils I think.
>xfce4-appfinder can also be part of xfce-utils.
i dunno. i think they're pretty ok as toplevel modules. i don't really
have a strong opinion.
>What do you think?
i think i should already be in bed...
More information about the Xfce4-dev