Re: IDEA: IceDE (lightweight LXDE competitor)
Brought to you by:
captnmark
From: Jason H. <jhs...@ja...> - 2012-03-29 05:00:30
|
How many (or few) people work on IceWM? How small is the JWM team? How many people work on KDE, GNOME, Xfce, and LXDE? I was under the impression that IceWM is better supported than JWM. IceWM has its own dedicated domain name, more documentation, and this mailing list. JWM does not have its own dedicated domain name, has less documentation, and doesn't have a forum or mailing list. The more I think about it, the more I think more of us need to join the IceWM development team. I can't take over the lead role (as I have my hands full running Swift Linux, and I'm STILL working on the first Mint-based release), but I'd be glad to contribute to the team. On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 20:50:08 +0200 Denis Prost <den...@wa...> wrote: > Hi Jason, > > I agree, icewm is light, simple, efficient, much more user-friendly than > fluxbox to my point, and acting in a familiar way to Windows user. > It's a really disappointing thing about open source software, so much > good projects that one time or another die, while other people start new > ones, letting users never having a sound and bug free desktop > environment (KDE is typical about that, KDE3 only needed some light > improvements and bug fixing, why having put it to garbage and started > KDE4 which is much more bloated, more complicated to configure with all > these superfluous desktop effects, and still not stable enough after 8 > main releases ! Sure, there is the trinity project which is a nice > effort to keep KDE3 alive, but it looks like the team as too few members > to be able to fix bugs and provide a really stable working environment, > many bugs are two years old and no work on them since then). > Maybe you're right, the best combination at present time could be jwm+Rox. > Regards, > > Denis > > > > Le 28/03/2012 19:43, Jason Hsu a écrit : > > That's a shame. I use IceWM in Swift Linux for many reasons: > > 1. IceWM provides a user-friendly feel that won't intimdate people who have been using Windows 95/98/XP. > > 2. IceWM + ROX is even lighter than LXDE, which is already lighter than Xfce. (And Xfce is lighter than GNOME and KDE.) > > 3. antiX Linux offers a template for a successful IceWM + ROX pinboard setup. It's so much easier to copy a setup that already works (even if I have to make some modifications) than to create a new solution completely from scratch. > > 4. Fluxbox isn't as user-friendly as IceWM. I'm not sure how to describe it, but I've tried both IceWM and Fluxbox on the full version of antiX Linux, and IceWM is so much better. > > 5. JWM doesn't seem to be as well documented or supported as IceWM. > > > > That said, if IceWM pulls a Unity or disappears from the Debian repositories (like gtkdialog recently did), then I'm switching to JWM. Puppy Linux has successfully used JWM + ROX pinboard for years to provide a user-friendly interface. antiX Linux M12 now offers a JWM + ROX pinboard setup that looks and feels similar to its traditional IceWM + ROX pinboard setup. > > > > On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 08:26:37 +0200 > > Denis Prost<den...@wa...> wrote: > > > >> Hi all, > >> > >> I agree Jason, that would be a great idea if someone could take care of > >> it (I used myself to run icewm+rox pinboard in the past) but we first > >> have to make sure that icewm is still maintained : there are bugs > >> pending - some of them a little annoying - and no new release since > >> quite a lot of time. > >> Regards, > >> > >> Denis > >> -- Jason Hsu <jhs...@ja...> |