Subject: [[email-masked]: Re: KDE window manager compliance]

From: Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 16:57:09 +0200

Here is the reply Matthias Ettrich sent me:

----- Forwarded message from [email-masked] -----

Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 16:53:27 +0200
Subject: Re: KDE window manager compliance
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]

On Tue, 27 Apr 1999, you wrote:
>Hi Matthias,
>...
[skipped, I asked him in German]

Roberto, didn't you someday write some documentation regarding window manager
complicance? Can you please send this to Dominik?

Regarding the hints: All window manager communication in KDE is handled in a
single class, called KWM. This class is in libkdecore/kwm.[h,cpp].

There's heaps of documentation in the kwm.h file, describing what the hints are
supposed to do. Please have also a look at the kwm.cpp file that contains very
straightforward code how the properties are applied.

While I really appreciate fvwm becoming KDE-aware, I have to warn you a little
bit: I'm currently working with other window manager and/or desktop "vendors"
on a new standard for all these things (together with people from gnome and
other projects).  

That means: for KDE-2.0 we plan to implement a new, common,  better, cleaner
and more documentated window manager protocol which is supposed portable among
the different desktops.

----- End forwarded message -----

Bye

Dominik ^_^

-- 
Dominik Vogt, Hewlett-Packard GmbH, Dept. BVS
Herrenberger Str.130, 71034 Boeblingen, Germany
phone: 07031/14-4596, fax: 07031/14-3883, [email-masked]
--
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] (Paul D. Smith)
Date: 27 Apr 1999 11:36:01 -0400

%% Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]> writes:

  dv> That means: for KDE-2.0 we plan to implement a new, common,
  dv> better, cleaner and more documentated window manager protocol
  dv> which is supposed portable among the different desktops.

That sounds way cool, of course, but the question is... what is the
timeframe for KDE 2?  If it's around the same time as we're planning
2.4.0 (early summer?) then maybe we should wait for it--being one of the
first to support the new protocol would be a nice feather.

If it's much later, I wouldn't bother waiting; we can always cut a quick
release if we want to.

But, we might also reconsider supporting KDE in 2.4.0 in light of this
new info, and also since none of the KDE people seem that interested in
doing the work for us :).

And to be honest, KDE's window manager, while definitely not as great as
FVWM :), is certainly nowhere near as annoying (IMHO) as E, so KDE
doesn't need FVWM support nearly as urgently as GNOME does (again IMHO).

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Paul D. Smith <[email-masked]>         Network Management Development
 "Please remain calm...I may be mad, but I am a professional." --Mad Scientist
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   These are my opinions---Nortel Networks takes no responsibility for them.
--
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, 27 Apr 1999 19:10:10 +0200

> doesn't need FVWM support nearly as urgently as GNOME does (again IMHO).

But perhaps *we* need KDE support urgently.

Bye

Dominik ^_^

---

From: [email-masked] (Paul D. Smith)
Date: 27 Apr 1999 13:25:16 -0400

%% Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]> writes:

  >> And to be honest, KDE's window manager, while definitely not as
  >> great as FVWM :), is certainly nowhere near as annoying (IMHO) as
  >> E, so KDE doesn't need FVWM support nearly as urgently as GNOME
  >> does (again IMHO).

  dv> But perhaps *we* need KDE support urgently.

Why?

---

From: Jason L Tibbitts III <[email-masked]>
Date: 27 Apr 1999 12:50:51 -0500

>>>>> "PDS" == Paul D Smith <[email-masked]> writes:

PDS> %% Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]> writes:
dv> But perhaps *we* need KDE support urgently.

PDS> Why?

To maintain a user base, perhaps?  If KDE is the way of the future then
FVWM could become largely irrelevant.  And I certainly don't want to be
stuck with KWM.

Free software projects like this one shouldn't really have to do
"marketing" but it does help to anticipate what the users are going to want
in the future in order to keep those users.

 - J<

---

From: Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 19:48:53 +0200

> in the future in order to keep those users.

I couldn't have phrased this better.

Bye

Dominik ^_^

---

From: [email-masked] (Paul D. Smith)
Date: 27 Apr 1999 15:52:58 -0400

PDS> Why?

  >> "marketing" but it does help to anticipate what the users are going
  >> to want in the future in order to keep those users.

  dv> I couldn't have phrased this better.

This is a fine argument for including KDE support, and I agree with it.

But if we're going to have to write KDE 1.x support ourselves for 2.4.x
then just chuck it all out in order to support the new, improved,
completely different KDE 2.x soon thereafter, my question is why bother?

Maybe I'm optimistic but I don't see FVWM losing serious "market share"
in the near term due to lack of KDE 1.x support.  How many people who
use KDE _really_ want a different WM?  My _impression_ is that most
people who use KDE do so precisely _because_ it's a complete package,
and they're not interested in taking bits here and there.  GNOME, on the
other hand, needs a good WM and those folks appear to be much more
comfortable mixing and matching.

Well, I'm certainly not going to tell anyone what to work on and if
someone does the work, cool.  I just hope we don't hold up 2.4.0 waiting
for KDE support.  I'd like to see us start to move more aggressively to
a 2.4.0 release: now that the GSFR and GNOME are in what major
components are we waiting for?  Let's start thinking about
feature-freeze and revving up the beta/bugfix cycle.

PS. I realize I'm shouting from the peanut gallery since I've been too
    busy with GNU make stuff to do any actual FVWM work :-/.  Feel free
    to ignore me.