Post by Harry portobelloPost by Chris Siebenmann| > [...] There are several reasons as of why certain patches aren't
| > accepted. Some of the patches affect areas of fvwm which in the long
| > term goal should be replaced by modules. Others are unclean, and no
| > one has been willing to clean up the code and write documentation for
| > the patches.
|
| i get this but if no work has happened why cant we use the patches?
| its these delays which make users want to use another window manager
You should be able to use the patches without problems, assuming that
they apply cleanly; just build a personal version of fvwm with the
patches applied. No one requires that you run only fvwm source straight
from the distribution tarballs or the CVS repository.
If the patches do not apply cleanly or do not work as-is, well, someone
has to do the work to make them work. The fvwm maintainers are not going
to do this work for patches that they feel are a bad idea, for obvious
reasons.
i understand this, chris, but i still do not think you understand my
point. these patches, good or bad, have been about for years and no
fvwm developer has wanted to clean them up
i do not need to understand why - but if their not going to be applied
soon - they should issue a statement to say this, and then let others
fork fvwm
right now i am thinking i will fork fvwm - no one who is a developer
Here is an idea what you could do for the FVWM community:
You could write how-tos yourself about using certain patches,
publish them at your own website or in a wiki somewhere at fvwm.org,
and make your how-tos known.
I don't need windows with round corners, because round corners
do not accelerate any kind of workflow. They are just superfluous
(I really don't want that FVWM becomes yet another bloated, unusable
KDE4). But if someone wants to apply such kind of patch, why shouldn't
he/she be able to read a how-to, apply the patch and finally use it?
Write these how-tos, collect the patches somewhere, show your
readers where they can find the patches and how to use them, and
make your contributions to the FVWM project this way.
The next possible mistake you could make may be that you include
too much of yout frustration into the how-tos. But the advantage
of the process of writing down something is that people or later
you can spot the flaws in your how-tos, and you can defuse them
during the next iterations. The final result will be a collection
of how-tos useful for the community.
Another thing: Your English skills are not very good, because
you are (like me) not a native speaker. Writing how-tos in bad
language that is difficult to read could be contra-productive
(the better the language the more useful is the how-to). But,
my English skills improved dramatically as soon as I started
writing technical documentation in English. Writing manuals could
be a chance for you to improve your language skills. Once again,
writing down something and constantly revising your products
in iterations is the key to improve your language skills,
improve the value of your how-tos and finally to improve the
value you could provide potential users of the patches.
Try to establish a focal point about how to apply FVWM patches,
and perhaps you could start a new community of people who like
different flavors of patched FVWM versions.
Post by Harry portobellocares to answer me. i find that suckie
what patches do you write which you maintain then?
Harry
Michael