Thomas Adam <tho...@fvwm.org> writes: > On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 03:18:13PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote: >> Some features that have been removed in mvwm that I'm not sure >> about: >> >> 1. FvwmCpp and FvwmM4 > > Heh. In my mind, it came back to maintainability, and from time-to-time we > often see problems with people trying to use these modules. but with nonone > in the development team really "owning" them, so most of the problems end up > either being ignored or worked around at some higher level. (Some of the > problems may be surrounding the whole approach of ModuleSynchronous, etc., > but that's tangential to my point.)
Since I added ModuleSynchronous, I'll defend it. If I recall correctly, it made sense for FvwmAnimate and I'm not aware of it causing any problems. I also use CPP, a very nice feature. I'm not really in favor of pulling features without having a good backup plan. -- Dan Espen
