Renaming of Xfce components

Jelle de Jong jelledejong at
Wed Apr 8 09:19:28 CEST 2009

Jannis Pohlmann wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 20:49:39 +0200
> Jelle de Jong <jelledejong at> wrote:
>> Jannis Pohlmann wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2 Apr 2009 09:47:51 +0200
>>> Nick Schermer <nickschermer at> wrote:
>>>> 2009/4/2 Yves-Alexis Perez <corsac at>:
>>>>> On jeu, 2009-04-02 at 08:13 +0200, Nick Schermer wrote:
>>>>>> renaming other components that are core parts of
>>>>>> the Xfce desktop sound like a stupid idea resulting in a lot of
>>>>>> work for absolutely nothing.
>>>>> Naaah, that's just fnu!
>>>> Yea read that, after scrolling down (didn't expect any jokes this
>>>> morning after reading my mail last night, I admit). But I do know
>>>> people want such renaming, same as gdesktopmenu, which i still
>>>> find a bit sad. Crossdesktop is how stuff is written, not the
>>>> name. Sounds a bit like we're not proud of Xfce anymore. 
>>> I think that psychology plays an important role in the adaption of
>>> libraries in the *nix world. I mean, why do we not depend on any
>>> important libraries with 'gnome' in the name? And why does GNOME not
>>> depend on any Xfce libraries? And why do we all use D-Bus, GTK+ and
>>> HAL?  Of course it's not all about the name but it can make it
>>> harder to get a library acknowledged cross-desktop. 
>>> It's not about being proud of Xfce or anything. There is a reason
>>> why DeviceKit, PolicyKit, HAL, D-Bus, DConf and tons of other
>>> libraries have more generic names rather than carrying the name of
>>> their origins with them. You could as well approach the "problem"
>>> from another angle: Why would you want to name a library after one
>>> desktop if you want it to be used cross-desktop? 
>>> The "g" has been sort of established in the GLib/GTK+ sector and I
>>> fail see how that is a bad thing.
>>>> Personally i think if we
>>>> show the Xfce libraries/applications are crossdesktop and they are
>>>> used by more people, it will result in Xfce being more popular and
>>>> that's why we write software, make Xfce better but help open-source
>>>> (more global) too.
>>> Yes, it would be nice if Xfce libraries were used on other desktops.
>>> But this is not the case for most of the GNOME libraries either, at
>>> least not the ones that have 'gnome' in their name.
>>> (And yes, of course the mail which started this thread was an April
>>> fools joke.)
>>>   - Jannis
>> Well, I have to commit on this thread, there is a good thought behind
>> it and I think the xdgconf naming is a good move.
>> If there is no reason why an other environment can't use the libs and
>> the code is not specially xfce desktop code dependent then why should
>> make it a general code name? It would at least lower the adoption
>> threshold.
> The whole thing (except for gdesktopmenu) was an april fool's joke!
>   - Jannis

Well, you know, I can read :-) so I know it was an April fool's joke ;-)
but as I said there are some points that can have a positive effect on
the xfce community.

gconf does not have a good image outside the GNOME community, it is
sometimes seen as the MS windows Register tool of GNOME and it is indeed
hard to configure when changing cascading rules system-width on more then
50 systems.... the thing is xfconf is not gconf, but the name suggest its
the same thing except for the xfce environment.

There have been drafts at the wiki for creating a desktop
independent configuration system for applications. Why not make xfconf
desktop independent and make it xdgconf so other light desktop
applications can also use the software. I would really like to see this,
and that the name xf or xfce is not part of the appname is not a bad
thing or does not tell the user the tool is not developed by xfce, for
example all the GNU software does not have GNU in there name, just look
at the man page, help info etcetera, and let inform the user as normal
where the software comes from, why not giving back desktop independent
software to the this is not a bad thing is it?

I understand it kind of late to rename the xfconf tool since it takes a
lot of energy to rename it. But I would like the thought behind it to
integrate into the xfce community, try to develop desktop independent and
try to make libraries usable and available for other application other
then the xfce specific applications.

I also see this enironment depended development in other systems like GPE
 enironment, openbox, xfce environment, why not try as much as possible
to find a mutual configuration systems and base it on standards.

For example, configuration systems like xdgconf, settings for window
managers, themes, keyboard shortcuts, file-manager custom actions, etcetera.

What is are the thoughts of the developers about this?

Best regards,


More information about the Xfce4-dev mailing list