From: Mondragon, I. <ian...@ba...> - 2003-07-28 19:28:05
|
sounds like me with my laptop! -----Original Message----- From: Chris B. Vetter [mailto:ch...@we...] Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 1:53 PM To: int...@li... Subject: Re: [Interfacewm-discuss] Integration of GSDock On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 16:48:11 -0500 Ian Mondragon <co...@dr...> wrote: [...] > eric? chris? greg? consensus? :-) Sounds good to me, but I'll be out-of-business (so to say) for a while. A few weeks ago, the motherboard of my main machine (K7) died so I had to revert back to an old K6-200 *sigh* (ever tried to compile GNUstep on one of these beasts? ... DON'T...) and Saturday it crashed the RAID my home (including ALL sources) is, or rather was, on. Yes, I've backed up on a regular basis, but I decided to replace the whole schtuff with a complete new machine... No use keeping that old crap around...:-P -- Chris ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now. Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET. http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100003ave/direct;at.aspnet_072303_01/01 _______________________________________________ Interfacewm-discuss mailing list Int...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/interfacewm-discuss |
From: Mondragon, I. <ian...@ba...> - 2003-07-29 05:00:41
|
greg: i completely agree. that's why i asked what level of integration chad had in mind :-) i know that i don't want to have to pass a flag to IWM in order to not run the dock! chad: know what we're sayin? <grin> i was just hoping that you were still refering to having communication take place via notifications (which was the decision after much thought). i've been very impressed by the work you've put into gsdock, but i too want to keep the two projects separated to some degree. if you are willing to work on the IWMComponent architecture, i would love to see how things evolve, as gsdock is *exactly* the sort of of functional piece that we've needed in order to put some real work behind the theory. iwm-core: while IWM may be my baby (albeit a very neglected and malnourished one at the moment), i have made it a team/community project, and i would love to hear everyone's opinion on the matter. - ian -----Original Message----- From: ceh...@ma... [mailto:ceh...@ma...] Sent: Sunday, July 27, 2003 9:47 PM To: int...@li... Subject: Re: [Interfacewm-discuss] Integration of GSDock Ok, now I'm completely confused! When I released the first GSdock I asked if we could have some method for GSdock to communicate with interfacewm, to handle windows I believe, you guys said that you were working on having frameworks in place to extend interfacewm (in the same process). Now I am hearing that we should have separate apps, which I thought was the best way as well? Remember this discussion? I wanted interfacewm to be able to delegate the miniaturization of windows to an outside process, such as GSDock. This would simplify the development of interfacewm, WFor example, when a window is minizied, interfacewm simply tells GSdock and it will nicely place it in the dock, and vice-versa. I got the feeling the response was that this was not the direction interfacewm was headed. Rather, it was headed to having a type of in process "plug-in" framework for things like a dock. Is this not the case anymore? Chad On Sunday, July 27, 2003, at 12:55 PM, Gregory John Casamento wrote: > Ian, > > I as going to chime in earlier on this. I belive that the Dock > should remain > a seperate application from the window manager. Communication > between the two > can / should be established by a DO connection or a distributed > notification. > > We should not repeat the mistake that was made with WindowMaker by > integrating > the Dock into the windowmanager. > > Chad, please keep up the excellent work on GSDock. I've been wanting > a GNUstep > specific dock for a very long time. :) > > Thanks, GJC > > --- Ian Mondragon <co...@dr...> wrote: >> >> On Saturday, July 26, 2003, at 05:53 PM, ceh...@ma... wrote: >>> I give in! :-) >> >> give in to what? the lull of down time? <sigh> all i need is a nice, >> long cat 5 cable to hook all of my boxen back up this week & i'm back >> in business... >> >>> I would like to integrate GSDock into interfacewm. I think that this >>> is the best way to go about it. I'm getting sick of windowmaker and >>> I >>> think it's time for a good change. >> >> what level of integration are we talking about here? don't get me >> wrong - the idea is definitely a good thing, in my opinion. i'm just >> wondering how tightly you're thinking the binding should be. >> >>> I would also be interested in working on the interfacewm components >>> itself as well. Can you grant me cvs access to interfacewm so i can >>> begin work on this? >> >> eric? chris? greg? consensus? :-) >> >> - ian >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including >> Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now. >> Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET. >> http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100003ave/ >> direct;at.aspnet_072303_01/01 >> _______________________________________________ >> Interfacewm-discuss mailing list >> Int...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/interfacewm-discuss > > > ===== > Gregory John Casamento > -- bheron on #gnustep, #linuxstep, & #gormtalk ---------------- > Please sign the petition against software patents at: > http://www.petitiononline.com/pasp01/petition.html > Petition to make Lighthouse Application Suite Free Software at: > http://www.petitiononline.com/laafs/petition.html > --- Main Developer of Gorm (featured in April Linux Journal) --- > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now. Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET. http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100003ave/direct;at.aspnet_072303_01/01 _______________________________________________ Interfacewm-discuss mailing list Int...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/interfacewm-discuss |
From: Mondragon, I. <ian...@ba...> - 2003-07-29 12:52:37
|
perfect. thanks, chris. -----Original Message----- From: Chris B. Vetter [mailto:ch...@we...] Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 8:33 PM To: ceh...@ma... Cc: int...@li... Subject: Re: [Interfacewm-discuss] Integration of GSDock On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 16:46:40 -1000 ceh...@ma... wrote: [...] > Rather, it was headed to having a type of in process "plug-in" > framework for things like a dock. Is this not the case anymore? [...] I may be wrong here, so correct me if I am -- it depends on how you interpret 'integration'. What Greg is/was saying is that having GSDock as a part of IWM on a binary level (like wmaker and its dock and "fiend") is a bad idea, and I agree. Having GSDock as part of a "suite", a bundle, an external binary, whatever, IMHO is a good idea. If we create/offer a framework that can be used for integration (again the dreaded word :-) that can be used to _extend_ the functionality of IWM up to a point that IWM is a window manager suite (the actual manager plus "goodies" like a dock) both (manager and goodies) will be much more versatile. With that respect we may want to look closely at what Deek's (not sure who else is involved directly) Backbone is implementing as it seems like they work on a similar thing, albeit more related to a Workspace application. -- Chris ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now. Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET. http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100003ave/direct;at.aspnet_072303_01/01 _______________________________________________ Interfacewm-discuss mailing list Int...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/interfacewm-discuss |