[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: remove wm/oroborus + it's utilities?
I've got to admit having a soft spot for many retro window managers -
they're often very artistic, and I think there's value in keeping them
around to preserve UX patterns and aesthetics, but oroborus isn't realy
one I'm particularly attached to (unlike, say, blackbox, fvwm, qvwm,
This is in contrast to old desktop environments, which tend to be
entangled messes and generally a maintenance burden.
1) Are the dependencies problematic (does it depend on rotting build
tools, old widget toolkits, or similar)? From a quick glance at
oroborus itself, it's pretty much depending on X11 and autoconf,
stuff that's going to be around for a very long time.
It's not written in ancient C++ or K&R C, so it's got a pretty
good chance of continuing to work with modern compilers.
deskmenu has a dependency on GTK 2.
2) Are we carrying around a lot of technical debt (like undocumented
patches and workarounds for NetBSD 4)?
The package wm/oroborus looks exceptionally clean.
The others are also quite good.
3) Is oroborus unique or historically important enough to be worth
keeping? I'd guess no - from what I remember it was the default
window manager of very old GNOME (... or was that Sawfish)?.
Not sure how much use it's seen outside of that context.
After trying it out in Xnest, it seems pretty boring.
4) Is it a burden for people running bulk builds? I run them quite
frequently and I've rarely noticed oroborus's existence - it
consistently builds quickly.
5) Does it still work well? When I tried it, I found it basic enough
that there's very little to go wrong.
Main Index |
Thread Index |