Bug#495784: ITP: lxtask -- process manager for Lightweight X11 Desktop Environment
Package: wnpp Severity: wishlist Owner: Andrew Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * Package name: lxtask Version : 0.1 Upstream Author : Hong Jen Yee (PCMan) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> * URL : http://lxde.org * License : (GPL) Programming Lang: (C) Description : process manager for Lightweight X11 Desktop Environment A GUI application for monitoring and controlling running processes. -- System Information: Debian Release: lenny/sid APT prefers unstable APT policy: (500, 'unstable') Architecture: i386 (i686) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#495784: ITP: lxtask -- process manager for Lightweight X11 Desktop Environment
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 08:17:38PM +0800, Andrew Lee wrote: > * Package name: lxtask You know that lxtask is just a rip of xfce4-taskmanager? Is it really useful to have both in the archive? Why not have upstreams merge the stuff, instead of duplicating? Cheers, -- Yves-Alexis -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#495784: ITP: lxtask -- process manager for Lightweight X11 Desktop Environment
Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: > On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 08:17:38PM +0800, Andrew Lee wrote: >> * Package name: lxtask > > You know that lxtask is just a rip of xfce4-taskmanager? Is it really > useful to have both in the archive? Why not have upstreams merge the > stuff, instead of duplicating? Yes, I know, so I didn't package it in the beginning. The reason to package it because lxtask can independent runs with other DE without any additional dependence, but xfce4-taskmanager needs xfce4 related dependence. Cheers, -Andrew -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#495784: ITP: lxtask -- process manager for Lightweight X11 Desktop Environment
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 08:06:38AM +0800, Andrew Lee wrote: > The reason to package it because lxtask can independent runs with other > DE without any additional dependence, but xfce4-taskmanager needs xfce4 > related dependence. I don't really see libxfcegui4 or libxfce4util as huge dependencies, and don't really see why there's a need to rip them off. We usually use shared libraries for good reason. Some of them are too big and bring in too many stuff, but I don't think it really applies to Xfce libs. Anyway, I still think it wasn't worth forking and that improvements could have been integrated upstream. Cheers, -- Yves-Alexis -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
