Re: Vote [was: Goodbye AfterStep for the Nth Time]

J.D. Jordan (jdj5e@virginia.edu)
Thu, 13 Aug 1998 09:32:28 -0400 (EDT)


On Wed, 12 Aug 1998, Guylhem Aznar wrote:
> > modifications, and using /etc/X11/wmconfig?  Remember that if you
> > support it, they will come.  Be the first to support a standard and the
> > others will follow.  Lead them  :)
> 
> That's a good idea but :
>  * I have both a debian and a redhat : debian 1.3 has no /e/X/w 
>  * Is /etc/X11/wmconfig a dir like start/ ? (I'm on my debian notebook)
>  * What should we do on non redhat unices // redhat linux ?
> wmconfig will already be full of other options on redhats, while we can do
> whatever we want on our own dir.
> 
> I see no problem replacing /u/l/s/a/start by /e/X/w if we keep the same
> possibilities, i.e. system wide options, users own options, ease of adding
> new options.
> 
> Is it ok for anyone ?

I think this would be a bad thing, well, if thats the only spot it checked
anyway, maybe we could have some sort of option to tell AS where to look
for the start menu stuff either compile time or in one of the
configuration files.  I think using /e/X/w would be bad because all of the
afterstep configuration stuff should be under the same hierarchy (sp?),
scattering AS config stuff throughout different dir's would just make
configuration that much more confusing.  So, if /e/X/w is just another
place besides the start dir that as looks I think its ok, if /e/X/w is the
only place, I think thats bad.

JD


--
   WWW:   http://www.afterstep.org/
   FTP:   ftp://ftp.afterstep.org/
   MAIL:  http://www.caldera.com/linuxcenter/forums/afterstep.html