On Fri, 8 Sep 2000, Jon Pennington wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 08, 2000 at 08:18:33AM -0400, Gregory J. Barlow wrote:
> > On Fri, 8 Sep 2000, Laszlo Radanyi wrote:
> >
> > > Yes, a nice idea. And, to support this further, we could add these
> > > 'flags' or 'states' in the menu file. I want to create a lot easier
> > > menu file format anyway...
> > >
> > > like
> > > ...
> > > myprog "My terrific log app" top,stick
> > > gkrellm "The Gtk monitor" right,top,stick
> > > ...
> > >
> > > Really - why not discuss this seriously ?
> > > /L
> > > ---
> > > Laszlo Radanyi - (Contact info at www.four11.com)
> >
> > This is not something everyone wants. Some of us use blackbox because its
> > resistant to feature creep.
>
> Code FORK! Code FORK! Code FORK!
>
> Seriously, though; feature creep is a strange thing. Almost every feature that bb
>has now is fully configurable, either by a compile-time flag or run-time settting.
>This shouldn't hurt that badly. I kinda' like the idea of allowing bbpager to handle
>this...
>
>
We could make a tool (or make it part of bbpager) which would place a
application of a certain class/name on a certain desktop, sticky, without
decorations.....Similar to what fvwm does.
I was planning to make this a part of bbappman (an higly configurable
application manager/bar). But maybe it would be best to make this a
seperate tool. I can start this in 3 weeks (I'm on vacation until then).
So if nobody does this (I thought we already had a volunteer), I'll
probably will.
John Kennis
