Re: wm in default installation

-f [Wed Jan 12, 2005 at 01:28:11AM +0100] wrote:
>i really don't want to start a religious war on wm's, because
>it doesn't really matter what's in base, everybody adds
>his/her favourite one after install anyway (so i dont mind
>fvwm at all, and don't use it at all as well).
>
That's not correct. I know many people which are using the "base"
fvwm, including me.

>but if license and depedencies matter, i would still suggest blackbox...
>
>pros:
>-BSD licence
>-well tested, well known
>-lightweight (WANTLIB=ICE SM X11 Xext c m stdc++)
>-development stopped
>
I don't understand why "development stopped" is a pro?!

>cons:
>-development stopped
> (patches can't go upstream, but there's only 3 of them)
>-???
>
Import a wm which isn't under active development anymore makes no
sense. (IMHO) Nobody can/will fix bugs in blackbox because there is
fluxbox. (it's derived from blackbox)
The existing three patches are not the problem, but future bugs are.
Or can you fix the blackbox bugs which maybe show up on sgi or zaurus?
(if they ever get X support ;) )

Just my opinion. :)

Regards,
	Bernd