> So as many of you know, Awesome's Wikipedia page was > deleted for really dubious reasons.
what a shame, lets get it back... > the most difficult thing I've found to deal with is the name Well, it has some drawbacks, but I love such humorous, self-embracing approach to app-naming. If the doc is good enough, and everyone writing a third-party-howto can stick to convention of once writing awesome window manager in her article, I'd vote for keepin' (although LegendWM is neat too...) > clear documentation would certainly help cant second that enough. the only package the updates of which i ignore is awesome, ever since i looked for 3.3->3.4 migration doc (well, actually i had to figure out i was supposed to be looking for such in the first place by having been surprised with a messed up config) and decided it was too quirky. same for customization: i still have the out-of-the-box setup, with battery monitor as an exception. the fact that i still am a fierce advocate and identify most strongly with awesome may show how cool i find it, but it has much more potential in terms of easing customization, i think. OTOH, if the devs do what they can and noone ever stepped up for constructing good docs around it, then thats what it is, and awesome nevertheless. best, dpl -- To unsubscribe, send mail to awesome-devel-unsubscr...@naquadah.org.
