|Re: [Sawfish] Comparison of extensible window managers.|
[ Thread Index |
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/sawfish Archives
On Saturday 20 August 2011 16:49:30 Teika Kazura wrote:
> Hi, dear Sawfish users.
> Recently I've coined the word "extensible window managers". It
> should've been invented long before, but unfortunately I may be the
> Anyway Sawfish is the first of the category. Then StumpWM appeared,
> and recently Awesome and Xmonad have some popularity.
> I think it's worth comparing them, so I created a page for it:
> What's the features that make Sawfish superior to them? If you know
> any which is missing in that page, please tell us. Once we're well
> equipped, I'm going to ask other extensible WM's community.
> # I've written a bit in Wikipedia, too, and tried to put a link to
> # that page, but external links to wiki pages without good history are
> # automatically reverted. It's reasonable.
> Teika (Teika kazura)
other things you might consider in your comparison:
- FDO-Menu support (many people use menus, if the WM doesn't provide one, they
look for some panel wich offers one)
- EdgeActions (from the current way of development they gain a lot of
attention, Windows, GNOME-Shell/Mutter, Sawfish, KWin all got them
we are actually unbeatable in this regard in both functionality and flexibility
(with HotSpot/HotMove everything is possible, you could even write a whole
GTK+ app as EdgeAction) all we need is HotSpot/HotMove with real function
support rather than defvar-setq/lambda, but that's on TODO for 1.9
- WMaker dockapp support? WMaker development stalled, *box WM fully support
dockapps, Sawfish support exists, but Alexey can't finish it.
- Other things of interesset: Tiling, WindowRules, Desktop-Integration...
- Fluxbox. You may consider adding this one to your list, is also configurable
and the most popular in the list (your list).