On Sun, Jul 24, 2005 at 05:37:41AM +0200, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Sat, 23 Jul 2005 19:53:55 -0700, Gary Kline 
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> 
> kline>        To every contributor to 3.7, hat's off!
> 
> On behalf of all contributors, thank you :-)
> 
> kline>  It is outstanding++;
> 
> And there's still things to do with it.  Like adapting to the new
> Gnome/KDE specs.
> 
> kline>        and following Richard's example of putting an "X" on the 
> kline>        titlebar to kill the xterm|app, I have added 2 to do 
> kline>        f.fullzoom and f.iconify.  This more or less apes what 
> kline>        most wmanagers do and what Doze does: kill, resize, iconify.
> kline>        I'm wondering if this should be the default.  Builtin
> kline>        rather than done by hacking the ~/.ctmrc.
> 
> It's a good question, one which I've pondered myself...  Or there
> could be several system-wide configurations to choose from...

        Many involved apps have a /usr/local/share/doc/<app>/
        directory with "readme" files and examples and other 
        stuff.  An idea would be to have a
        ${PREFIX}/share/doc/ctwm/examples directory with several
        same configs.  

        I would be willing to make a few screenshots of my 
        ctwm configuration if the examples directory becomes 
        reality one of these days.   Or else would be happy 
        to send it to the webmaster.  

> 
> kline>        Any any rate, on the CTWM website would it make sense to
> kline>        have as many examples of users' .xsession and .ctwmrc files
> kline>        with sample screenshots?  
> 
> Uhm, I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say.  You have
> probably seen there there *are* a bunch of user-provided examples, so
> I wonder if you're trying to say there are too many?


        Where, praytell, are these example .xsession|.xinitrc and
        .ctwmrc files and the screen shots?  I got my first setup
        circa 1995 and moved from twm to ctwm; over the past ten
        years I have fine-tuned scores of times.  

        KDE and Gnome and other wm's probably have the same 
        "tune-ability", by editing XML or other files.  Or
        maybe not.  

        The ctwm man page has several examples of how to edit 
        .ctwmrc.  These have saved me from going *completely*
        bald ... or from putting even more dents in the sidewalk!

        If there are user-provided files and screenshots on the
        homepage, I missed them.  At any rate, I think that good
        examples are worth ten thousand words of man page style
        shorthand; so, no, there can hardly be too many.

        I've been using vi almost since BillJoy wrote it but I
        still don't use all it's features; it's the same with
        ctwm I'm sure.  So I'd like to see others' configs.
        Man! I can see myself wast--er, spending, :), *months*
        playing in this sandbox... .


> 
> The way I see CTWM (and you noted that yourself) is that it provides
> an endless amount of hacking possibilities, and thereby provides
> choices for a wide variety of personal preferences, so no wonder there
> are many different examples on how to do things!  I only see that as a
> good thing, and I can understand it may be challenging for the newbie.

        Yes, but this wm isn't for the beginner.  It isn't for
        those who are new to other paradigms that Windose and need
        KDE to make them feel secure.  (Maybe in 5 years somebody
        will hack a tool to make creating .xsession and .ctwmrc
        easier.)  I'm happy to be able to have everything just 
        where I want it.... even tho it is time-consuming to get things
        to fit.  Small price.

> 
> So I'm getting back to the idea of providing more than one system-wide
> configuration.  Does it make sense, and most of all, will we all be
> able to agree on them?  :-)
> 

        Can we open the list for suggestions for some N days or
        weeks?  Having a few system-wide setups makes sense to me.
        I can't see any rationale for having *one* default; I'd 
        like to hear others' thoughts...

        gary


-- 
   Gary Kline     [EMAIL PROTECTED]   www.thought.org     Public service Unix

Reply via email to