xfway: added support for alt-tab switcher

[Felipe Contreras]

On Tue, Aug 2, 2022 at 10:00 PM adlo <adloconwy at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2 Aug 2022, at 18:35, Gaël Bonithon <trash.paradise at protonmail.com> wrote:

> I was going to base my wlroots compositor on labwc, but it’s licensed as GPL2-only, whereas xfwm4 is GPL2+. I don’t want to do anything that would limit the options of future xfce developers.

If you don't want to limit the options of future Xfce developers, then
pick GPLv2-only. GPLv2-only ensures that if in the future Richard
Stallman comes with another one of his brainchilds and releases GPLv4,
the community around your project won't be affected.

Even if you agree with everything the GPLv3 says, there's no knowing
what will be in GPLv4.

If for some strange reason it turns out that GPLv4 ends up being a
sane license, then the community can have a vote, and if everyone
agrees, then you change the license to GPLv4-only. Problem solved.

This is common sense. If I've tested my program with a library version
1.10.3, I'd be happy to set the dependency to 1.10.x, or even 1.x, but
there's *no way* I'll set the dependency to x. I want to know what's
in 2.0, and I want to test that my program isn't affected by any big
changes before setting the dependency to 2.x.

To me it's strange to blindly trust an organization (GNU)--it's
strange to blindly trust... period. If you want to blindly trust the
GNU, that's fine, but it's not reasonable to demand that all your
contributors blindly trust the GNU as well.

Personally I want to decide what license my code gets distributed
with. GPLv3 isn't the same license as GPLv2, and GPLv4 won't be the
same license as GPLv2, so I would want the agency to make that
decision, and I can't imagine anyone not wanting it. Seems like a 1 IQ
question: "do you want to have a choice regarding X?". Even if I
eventually opt-out of making a decision regarding X, it's still
preferable to have the option to choose.

Being forced to do anything isn't good.

-- 
Felipe Contreras