Subject: Moving to fvwm name

From: Mikhael Goikhman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 10:32:01 +0000

I think it is a good time (the sooner we do this the better) to rename
our executable to fvwm. A symlink from fvwm2 to fvwm on the systems that
have symlinks will be supported for some time.

The similar thing should be done to the man page - fvwm.1. On some
uncommon systems symlinking man pages does not work, they expect the same
file name and .SH NAME, but people with such systems will use "man fvwm".

So the only presence of "2" will be in the .fvwm2rc name. This is a
subject for another thread. I want first to finish with the executable.

Any objections to move to "fvwm" executable now and not wait for 2.9.x?
This way we may remove support for fvwm2 link in 3.0.0, and people have
enough time to change their environments until then.

Regards,
Mikhael.
--
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: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 15:49:09 +0000

> file name and .SH NAME, but people with such systems will use "man fvwm".

I take this as everyone is agree or does not worry.

So I do this renaming today together with other utils/fvwm- renamings
that we agreed in the other thread.

Speak now if you have, before I change a lot of documentation, mainly
replacing fvwm2 with fvwm. :)

Regards,
Mikhael.

---

From: Dan Espen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 12:02:17 -0400

> replacing fvwm2 with fvwm. :)

Since I invoke fvwm2 with a shell named fvwm2, I don't feel this
has any impact on me.

I wonder what the various distros will do, they've been distributing
fvwm1 as fvwm for a long time now.

I suppose they'll just continue, only this time fvwm2 will be the old
one.

I'm curious, what do you intend to do with the .fvwm2rc?

-- 
Dan Espen                           E-mail: [email-masked]
444 Hoes Lane  Room RRC 1C-214      Phone: (732) 699-5570
Piscataway, NJ 08854
--
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: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 12:42:09 -0400 (EDT)

> I suppose they'll just continue, only this time fvwm2 will be the old

Perhaps they could be accomodated with:

	./configure --package-name=fvwm2
	./configure --package-name=fvwm
	./configure --package-name=SuperFvwmWithSteroidsAndCatWhiskers
	.
	.
	.
-- 
Larry Gensch                                          [email-masked]

            Working for COMPAQ for over a fourteenth of a century

---

From: Mikhael Goikhman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 16:50:14 +0000

> fvwm1 as fvwm for a long time now.

It is trivial to patch an ancient fvwm to produce fvwm1 executable.
But I don't really think we should encourage distributions to continue
to distribute fvwm-1.24r version.

> I'm curious, what do you intend to do with the .fvwm2rc?

To discuss this first.

My point is this. If we want others to think we have only one evolving
project, we should not use number suffixes.

I think:

1) Executable name should always be fvwm, regardless of a version.

2) The initial configuration file name should not be changed as well.

This is because version numbers have nothing magical. My guess is that
2.5.1 is much more different from 2.0.1, than 3.0.0 will be from 2.6.0.

I do think that ~/.fvwm/.fvwm2rc name is bad.
But it should be supported for some time, of course.

It is bad, because this is a main file, it should not be hidden.
~/.fvwm directory (or /use/share/fvwm for this purpose) is for fvwm files
only, so having .fvwm prefix is redudant. And "2".

Something like ~/.fvwm/config or ~/.fvwm/main would be ok.

I am not against (although I think it is not needed) if we introduce an
extention for fvwmrc files. I.e.: ~/.fvwm/main.fvwm or ~/.fvwm/main.fc.

Any of the suggested names above (or similar) would be good for me.

Regards,
Mikhael.

---

From: Michael Han <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 10:34:11 -0700

On Thu, Apr 11, 2002 at 04:50:14PM +0000, Mikhael Goikhman wrote:
> [snip]

For many years now I've placed my config in .fvwm/ and invoked fvwm2
with "-f $HOME/.fvwm/main". This always made better sense to me.

Heh, look at the random quote my .sig monster found!
-- 
[email-masked]                            http://www.mikehan.com/
coffee achiever                              San Francisco, California
"Notice how I blame my own mistakes on the lack of rules?" - Dan Espen 
--
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: Charles Hines <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 16:34:49 -0400

>>>>> "Michael" == Michael Han <[email-masked]> writes:

>> Any of the suggested names above (or similar) would be good for me.

Michael> For many years now I've placed my config in .fvwm/ and invoked fvwm2
Michael> with "-f $HOME/.fvwm/main". This always made better sense to me.

And I've always had a fairly simple single file ~/.fvwm2rc (and ~/.fvwmrc
before that), it makes more sense to me and I like it that way because it's
just like the rc files for my shell, XEmacs (although they are trying to
change that as well), etc.  Just my personal prefence, and I'd be a little
saddened if that method for holding the config info were no longer supported
(of course, I'd get over it pretty quickly).

I'd argue against the removing of the '2' from the names of the executable and
config files since there may be some sites that still have the "ancient"
version still lying around and I feel that it helps distinguish it for them,
but I guess it's been long enough now that those kinds of situations should be
few and far between. :)

Chuck

-- 
Charles K. Hines   <[email-masked]>   <[email-masked]>
Principal Scientist at ReQuest Technologies Inc   (http://www.ReQuestTech.com/)

         "You tell him and I will smack you.  I will smack you like a
            bad bad donkey, okay!" - Pepe in 'Muppets From Space'

---

From: Mikhael Goikhman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2002 22:00:00 +0000

> (of course, I'd get over it pretty quickly).

There are several independent things.

1) ~/.fvwm directory is required. We need a search directory for fvwm
itself, FvwmM4, FvwmCpp, FvwmForm and just everything else. There are at
least 10 scripts and modules wanting to write to the home directory, they
all should write to ~/.fvwm, like FvwmAnimate, FvwmConsole, FvwmForm etc.
FvwmConsole is a current violator and should be prosecuted.

2) It is not technically rc anymore, we have a full dynamism, when there
is no separation between static rc and dynamical commands.

3) A solution for you is simple: ln -s ~/.fvwm2rc ~/.fvwm/main
Or whatever name we choose.

> but I guess it's been long enough now that those kinds of situations should be

Removing of the '2' from everything except for executable and fvwm2rc was
decided in 1999. It is only a question of time when to complete the task.

I am not sure whether you said "yes" or "no", but it is too late. :)
I already changed "fvwm2" in your AUTHORS description to fvwm-2.0.x. :)

It was an interesting quest to find a replacement for fvwm2 (if at all)
in every single place. But it seems like a nightmare to do the same for
fvwm2rc, it is in 90 files. No way, somewhen we should do this.

Regards,
Mikhael.

---

From: Charles Hines <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 09:29:29 -0400

>>>>> "Mikhael" == Mikhael Goikhman <[email-masked]> writes:

Mikhael> On 11 Apr 2002 16:34:49 -0400, Charles Hines wrote:
...
>> (of course, I'd get over it pretty quickly).

Mikhael> There are several independent things.

Mikhael> 1) ~/.fvwm directory is required. We need a search directory for fvwm
Mikhael> itself, FvwmM4, FvwmCpp, FvwmForm and just everything else. There are
Mikhael> at least 10 scripts and modules wanting to write to the home
Mikhael> directory, they all should write to ~/.fvwm, like FvwmAnimate,
Mikhael> FvwmConsole, FvwmForm etc.  FvwmConsole is a current violator and
Mikhael> should be prosecuted.

Mikhael> 2) It is not technically rc anymore, we have a full dynamism, when
Mikhael> there is no separation between static rc and dynamical commands.

Oh, I understand the reasoning for it, as fvwm is not quite as simple as it
once was (another thing that saddens me slightly).  But I still use it in a
simple manner (my only module is the pager really) so I have no need for whole
directory structure initialization just yet.

Mikhael> 3) A solution for you is simple: ln -s ~/.fvwm2rc ~/.fvwm/main
Mikhael> Or whatever name we choose.

Or invoke via a shell script called fvwm2 that calls 'fvwm -f ~/.fvwm2rc', or
simply give in and go to the new setup or not upgrade my installation (won't
happen, just a "for instance").  As I said, I'd get over it pretty quickly. :)

>> I'd argue against the removing of the '2' from the names of the executable
>> and config files since there may be some sites that still have the
>> "ancient" version still lying around and I feel that it helps distinguish
>> it for them, but I guess it's been long enough now that those kinds of
>> situations should be few and far between. :)

Mikhael> Removing of the '2' from everything except for executable and fvwm2rc
Mikhael> was decided in 1999. It is only a question of time when to complete
Mikhael> the task.

Mikhael> I am not sure whether you said "yes" or "no", but it is too late. :)

Honestly, I don't have any strong feelings on the renaming or using multiple
config files in a directory instead of a single rc file, as I'm adaptable (and
my rather simple setup probably won't be affected much)...I was just in a
wierd mood yesterday and decided to pipe up on this subject. :)

And since I believe most of the major Linux distributions have dropped fvwm
entirely to make room for more KDE and Gnome stuff (which does more than
sadden me), I doubt that they'll be affected by the name change either.

Mikhael> I already changed "fvwm2" in your AUTHORS description to
Mikhael> fvwm-2.0.x. :)

Ah, it's definitely too late then! :)

Later,
Chuck