Re: LXQt-1.0.0 Window Manager?

[pin <voidpin%protonmail.com@localhost>]

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

On Monday, November 8th, 2021 at 1:46 AM, Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost> wrote:

> I'm not an lxqt user (and choose to avoid qt whenever I have a choice).

Preferences. I use frankenwm and no Desktop.

> So that sounds like pkgsrc (which is not a "distro", but I don't expect
> anyone to listen to comments like that ;-) is being urged to pick one so
> that users who "install lxqt" get a window manager.

Yes, openbox and xfwm4 are the obvious choices. I can test both before merging the update.

> So it sounds like this config is deprecated but perhaps still useful,
> and it makes sense to no longer include it in the package, but deleting
> the package should depend on the usual "we believe no one is using it"
> or "if anyone is using it we feel comfortable telling them that their
> continued use is ridiculous, without having any clue about their world
> and constraints".

Agree, I'll remove obconf-qt from the meta-package but, let the package be.

> > My suggestion is to keep both xfwm4 and openbox as a choice in the meta-package
> > but, drop and remove obconf-qt from pkgsrc.

Agree.

> I don't follow "choice". For xfwm4,

Sorry for my free/bad wording, I should have written package options.

it seems there would be a

> How would this dependency option interact with config files?

You are free to use openbox but, configuration is no longer handled by the DE.

> So I lean to "just make xfwm4 the WM for lxqt".
I'd guess the same situation will apply here and configuration in not handled by the DE.

As said, I'll test both and see which one feels more intuitive.
Thanks