new dev branch stuff

[Auke Kok]

Benedikt Meurer wrote:

>> [strip] 
>
>
[strip some more]

> Picking up what Auke suggested some time ago, the core of the desktop 
> environment should be very small and lightweight, leaving only the 
> core desktop applications in there, and having the "non-core 
> applications" outside the core.


I still second this and hope to pursue / support you in this in the 
future. The recent spur in xfce related applications dripping (it's not 
flushing in yet ;^)) seems to suggest that people find the platform 
ready for larger OSS adoption and are willing to fill in gaps they need 
filled (hence non-specific!).

This would ultimately be the strength of xfce. Not wandering into a 
forest of applications but focussing on strong (not large) and small 
(core) apllications supporting the rest. The true reason for /usr/bin 
being littered with small binaries spawns from this very same principle 
(use only what you need/right tool for the right job).

> I think, KDE and Gnome both went this way (and had to decide on 
> exactly the same issue) earlier, and somehow decided to go the complex 
> way with all-in-one.


that would kill Xfce before you can say bonobo-activation-client ;^)

On top of that it's totally not necessary. I'm frankly amazed that SUN 
hasn't started packing Xfce4 to replace CDE with Xfce4 on their solaris 
platform yet. Pissed off even. Really.

> My personal vision for Xfce was always to make it
>
>  (a) "just work"
>  (b) "easy to use"
>  (c) "lightweight"
>  (d) "advanced" (this is least important, IMHO)
>
> Atleast the first 3 points imply that the core is small and easy to 
> maintain, which isn't the case currently (I think I say that, as I was 
> the one that tried to release the beast!).


yes and no. There are a number of components currently in the core that 
IMIVHO do not belong there, and I've previsouly stated that concern 
already. However, it seems that perspectives on the needed size of a 
core are different. Even Wintendo started out lean-and-mean (well, in 
some ways it was), but KDE and GNOME went the same way as Microsoft with 
respect to scale, even though GNOME isn't built up that way when you 
really think of it, only KDE is.

Personally (well, this entire posting is my personal view), I think 
there are points where Xfce is lacking, and where it has bloat. The 
balance in this is delicate, and you will bump into many corners finding 
the edges.

>
> With all the recent changes and ideas popping up, I thought it was 
> time to ask if we still have a goal, or if we simply follow the 
> tradition of KDE and Gnome (which would basicly mean for me, to 
> re-think if its really worth to spend my spare time on Xfce).


here's one:

* eliminate (move away from/distantiate/etc) non-crucial core components
* establish and document the base standards for this core
* developer fringe applications to fill in users needs, publish outside 
of the core

Xfmedia is a good example of how this can be successfull (no kelnos, 
you're still gonna have to take the tram!), and xfce-goodies is being 
flooded at the moment with new tools.

okay enough ... I think I've made my point ;^)

sofar

>
> Benedikt
> _______________________________________________
> Xfce4-dev mailing list
> Xfce4-dev at xfce.org
> http://lunar-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce4-dev
>