Subject: CVS olicha: * Fixed the "lenght" of face_type if FANCY_TITLEBARS is defined,

From: FVWM CVS <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 14:14:52 -0600

CVSROOT:	/home/cvs/fvwm
Module name:	fvwm
Changes by:	olicha	01/10/29 14:14:52

Modified files:
	.              : ChangeLog 
	fvwm           : screen.h 

Log message:
* Fixed the "lenght" of face_type if FANCY_TITLEBARS is defined,
so that Solid colors work again

--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked]

---

From: Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 11:12:30 +0100

> so that Solid colors work again

Um, I hope these "#ifdef FANCY_TITLEBARS" are going away soon.
I've spent much time to reduce the amount of ifdefs over the past
years.  I don't think it's a good idea to start making the same
mistakes again.

--

Mikhael, now that the title bar patch is applied, can you please
make a branch for the stable versions right before said commit?

Bye

Dominik ^_^  ^_^

-- 
Dominik Vogt, email: [email-masked]
LifeBits Aktiengesellschaft, Albrechtstr. 9, D-72072 Tuebingen
fon: ++49 (0) 7071/7965-0, fax: ++49 (0) 7071/7965-20
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked]

---

From: Mikhael Goikhman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 13:12:55 +0000

> make a branch for the stable versions right before said commit?

I would prefer to fork starting from today, not at some arbitrary time in
the past. Considering how many new features we already added in 2.4.x, the
title bar patch is not bad (it mostly adds, not changes). The bug that
Olivier fixed was caused by this patch, but this is fixed now.

I may exclude this patch and fork, but maybe there are other opinions?

Another issue. It was planned that EWMH (Enhanced Window Manager Hints) is
done in 2.4.x series, but this is moved to 2.5.x now, right?

Regards,
Mikhael.

---

From: Olivier Chapuis <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 15:14:25 +0100

> I may exclude this patch and fork, but maybe there are other opinions?

I am agree to fork starting from "today". The change I made to FvwmScript
are *totally* backward compatible and are safe (I hope). Also I will
be happy to see this changes in 2.4.4

> done in 2.4.x series, but this is moved to 2.5.x now, right?

Yes, fvwm-ewmh contains some bad hacks (to fvwm2) and I do not think
that it is a good idea to apply it to the 2.4.x series. Moreover, I
think that the EWMH support should go inside fvwm2 (ifdefed a la GNOME).
I will start to work on such support once we've got a branch for the
stable tree. I needs "only" 3 or 4 months to complete such a work
(thanks to my previous work on fvwm-ewmh), but it can interfer with
(or depends on) the new Style stuff.

Maybe, we can have now a discussion on reallistic plan for the
near future (next six months)?

Regards, Olivier

---

From: Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 17:06:46 +0100

> be happy to see this changes in 2.4.4

I see no problem with the FvwmScript changes, but I don't think
it's a good idea to include new features like the title bar patch
in the stable branch.  We already have a lot of bug reports and we
want the 2.4 branch to become stable, not unstable, right?

Bye

Dominik ^_^  ^_^

---

From: Dan Espen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 11:31:33 -0500

> want the 2.4 branch to become stable, not unstable, right?

I'd  just like to point out  that as long as the  ifdefs remain in the
code, the code remains stable.

-- 
Dan Espen
444 Hoes Lane  Room RRC 1C-214           E-mail: [email-masked]
Piscataway, NJ 08854                     Phone: (732) 699-5570
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked]

---

From: Mikhael Goikhman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2001 17:44:15 +0000

> code, the code remains stable.

Well, not exactly, it was pointless to include the feature and disable it.
These latest #ifdef's are equivalent to #ifdef 1 by default and there was
one small change (supposedly fix) that was not ifdef'ed.

Anyway, I accept what Dominik is trying to say and I will do this.

Regards,
Mikhael.