Re: Good bye AfterStep ??

Jan Sacharuk (
Wed, 5 Aug 1998 14:01:11 -0600 (MDT)

On Wed, 5 Aug 1998, Steve Ki-Won Lee wrote:

@>On Wed, 5 Aug 1998, Jan Sacharuk wrote:
@>> On Tue, 4 Aug 1998, Steve Ki-Won Lee wrote:
@>> @>On Tue, 4 Aug 1998, tildouf wrote:
@>> @>
@>> @>-snip-
@>> @>> For me, the new AfterStep, since the 1.0, is a new window
@>> @>> manager. And i hope the developers of AS will continue
@>> @>> to improve my favorite Window Manager.
@>> @>
@>> @>Amen to that!!  
@>> @>
@>> like the fact that there's a list for the WM even if it does attract
@>> people like you that are pompous enough to call me 'narrowminded' and
@>> tell me to 'stop bitching' simply because I like an old version
@>> better.
@>That's rather perplexing, aren't you the one of the group of people who
@>_are_ complaining because of how "bloated" AS has become just because you
@>have to go thru the whopping 3 directory level structures to change
@>something?  Someone suggested a very good idea yesterday and ie., create
@>a symlink.  Those with open minds will look for creative ways to resolve
@>problems; those with narrow minds......

Actually, if you had bothered to read what I wrote, I mentioned that
no, I'm not just using V1.0 for the .steprc. I *am* a UNIX
programmer. I know how to use a command line like everyone else. And,
as someone else pointed out, there are facilities for using the
.steprc under 1.4.whatever. I tried a bunch, crashed AS a bunch, asked
for help, and still couldn't get it to work. I returned to 1.0 after
my installation of 1.4 was trashed.

@>Also, there _IS_ a reason for having the hierchial structure as someone so
@>graciously pointed out.  If the developers didn't created the G/L/A
@>structure in AS, I have a feeling that someone from the same group would
@>complain that it's not GNUStep compliant.  Someone else who was

This is true. I even knew that. Doesn't mean I have to like it. I
won't be using those directories until they actually have some
utility to me.

@>It comes down to this for me after hearing people complaining about the
@>difficulty of customizing and configuring the newer version of AS after a
@>few months--they don't like the hierchial structure--that by far has been
@>the general consensus of the complaining voices.  Well, Get Over It!  If
@>you're using 1.0 cause you don't like the newer version, then kudos to you
@>and _STOP_ wasting bandwith to complain.  And please don't gimme some
@>petty smark alec remark about how I'm doing the same thing here; I was
@>driven to it.

By a similar argument, I could say that you're narrow-minded for not
liking one large file better, that has tags set up so that when you do a
'^s wharf' your emacs takes you straight to the section with the wharf
customization stuff, and all you're doing is encouraging feature
bloat. Remember how I said I use tab, still? I'm looking for
functionality here, not the nifty gadgets that people feel hafta be
added at random just 'cause they can. Why do you think I'm not using
E? I think it's a neat concept, and a worthy project, but the work
that you have to do to get it running isn't for me. If I had my hands
on it, I'd have my few virtual desks, a couple of xterms, and a whole
bunch of extra bloat that I didn't need. Don't get on my case because
I still believe that funtionality is primary, and that we can still
get things done without including the kitchen sink.

@>> Get off your high (DEAD) horse, pal.
@>If trying to provide some light into dark, stale and narrow minds is
@>guilty of the above, then I'll gladly server a lifetime sentence for it.

Your idea of providing light by telling users of 1.0 to clam up and
grow up is laughable. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Just leave 'em
alone. If the WM gains something invaluable, you can be certain that
we'll switch. Don't tell me that GNUstep compliance is necessary to me
at this point.

This is the last thing I'll say on the topic to the list. If I respond
further, it'll be in private email.

Jan Sacharuk

 ****   ****
**   ***   ** GCS d- s++:-- a--- C++++@>$ UISX++>$ P L>++ E>++$ W++ N+ o? K-? 
**    *    ** w---(++++) !O !M V-- PS+>$ PE Y+ !PGP- t- 5+++>++++ X+ R tv--
 **  j.s  **  b++>+++ DI++++ D+ G++(+++)>++++ e>+++ h>$ r++ y+** 
  **  +  ** -----------------------------------------------------------------
   **v.y**  I may have slept for an hour...I may have slept for a day...  
    ** **  For I woke in a bed of white linen...and the sky was the
      *   color of clay...  -Sting