other window managers

[Lawrence Mao]

Just wondering whether RedHat or somebody else is
thinking about adding other lightweights window
managers besides that BlueCurve like Xfce, Fluxbox, or
Fvwm!  BlueCurve is nice but I don't need all those
bells and whistles.  I want something (window manager)
that is fast and doesn't take up a lot of system
resources...

Lawrence


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

[Havoc Pennington]

On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 10:40:21AM -0700, Lawrence Mao wrote:
>  Just wondering whether RedHat or somebody else is
>  thinking about adding other lightweights window
>  managers besides that BlueCurve like Xfce, Fluxbox, or
>  Fvwm!  BlueCurve is nice but I don't need all those
>  bells and whistles.  I want something (window manager)
>  that is fast and doesn't take up a lot of system
>  resources...
>   
We aren't thinking of doing this ourselves at Red Hat, but alternative
WMs are a prime example of the kind of package we'd like to see added
to Red Hat Linux by others.

Havoc

How to Propose Packages?

[Howard Owen]

How do you propose a package for inclusion under the new regime?
I have an auditing package called sudoscript that's been in contrib 
since 1.0.something. It's now at version 2.2.1 with 3.0 in testing.
I'd like to maintain in RHL. What's the process?

On Tue, 2003-07-22 at 12:31, Havoc Pennington wrote:
>  On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 10:40:21AM -0700, Lawrence Mao wrote:
>  > Just wondering whether RedHat or somebody else is
>  > thinking about adding other lightweights window
>  > managers besides that BlueCurve like Xfce, Fluxbox, or
>  > Fvwm!  BlueCurve is nice but I don't need all those
>  > bells and whistles.  I want something (window manager)
>  > that is fast and doesn't take up a lot of system
>  > resources...
>  > 
>  
>  We aren't thinking of doing this ourselves at Red Hat, but alternative
>  WMs are a prime example of the kind of package we'd like to see added
>  to Red Hat Linux by others.
>  
>  Havoc
>  
>  
>  --
>  Rhl-list mailing list
>  Rhl-list(a)redhat.com
>  http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhl-list 
-- 
Howard Owen                      "Even if you are on the right
EGBOK Consultants                 track, you'll get run over if you
hbo(a)egbok.com    [phone]  just sit there." - Will Rogers

How to Propose Packages?

[Bill Nottingham]

Howard Owen (hbo(a)egbok.com) said: 
>  How do you propose a package for inclusion under the new regime?
>  I have an auditing package called sudoscript that's been in contrib 
>  since 1.0.something. It's now at version 2.2.1 with 3.0 in testing.
>  I'd like to maintain in RHL. What's the process? 
bugzilla, against distribution.

Note that until we get more infrastructure for external contribution
up and going (which we're working on), there probably won't be much
movement on this front right away.

Bill

Re[2]: How to Propose Packages?

[Dmitry Tweritin]

Hello,

Tuesday, July 22, 2003, 11:55:35 PM, you wrote:

> > How do you propose a package for inclusion under the new regime?
BN> bugzilla, against distribution.

BN> Note that until we get more infrastructure for external contribution
BN> up and going (which we're working on), there probably won't be much
BN> movement on this front right away.

I  think  it  would  be  nice  for  everybody  to  discuss this future
infrastructure  in  this  list.  If  you  have some vision or just the
particular  ideas  about that, please, publish them. For example, what
you  think about staging - testing/unstable/stable etc. branches, some
kind of the scheme currently used by fedora and debian? I think this
will help a lot having some part (or maybe even main part) of packages
maintained by "external" people.


-- 
 snaky

How to Propose Packages?

[Havoc Pennington]

On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 12:16:01AM +0400, Dmitry Tweritin wrote: 
>  I  think  it  would  be  nice  for  everybody  to  discuss this
> future
>  infrastructure  in  this  list.  If  you  have some vision or just the
>  particular  ideas  about that, please, publish them. For example, what
>  you  think about staging - testing/unstable/stable etc. branches, some
>  kind of the scheme currently used by fedora and debian? I think this
>  will help a lot having some part (or maybe even main part) of packages
>  maintained by "external" people. 
Agree we should discuss, I would say rhl-devel-list is more
appropriate though. This is more of the user questions list and I'm
expecting it to be higher traffic.

Havoc

Re[2]: How to Propose Packages?

[Rik van Riel]

On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Dmitry Tweritin wrote:

>  I think it would be nice for everybody to discuss this future
>  infrastructure in this list. 
That's one of the reasons the infrastructure isn't
in place yet.  It'd have been bad if we came up with
something the external contributors didn't like ;)

-- 
Great minds drink alike.

How to Propose Packages?

[Havoc Pennington]

On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 12:47:47PM -0700, Howard Owen wrote:
>  How do you propose a package for inclusion under the new regime?
>  I have an auditing package called sudoscript that's been in contrib 
>  since 1.0.something. It's now at version 2.2.1 with 3.0 in testing.
>  I'd like to maintain in RHL. What's the process? 
Well, that's the catch. We don't have the infrastructure in place yet.

We've started by putting up a lot of our internal devel docs on
rhl.redhat.com, and moving our devel discussion from internal forums
to rhl-devel-list and #rhl-devel. So joining those is probably a good
step.

The problem is that our infrastructure for all the aspects of
maintaining a package is still partially internal.  So over the next
months, we will be trying to break down the barriers to external
contribution.

Right now, to accept an external package we'd basically need someone
internal to act as a proxy for you to build your SRPMs, we may do this
for two or three packages, but it isn't going to scale at all.

Havoc

How to Propose Packages?

[Howard Owen]

Thanks. I thought it might be a little early to ask. But it's good
to know what you guys are thinking. I agree a manual approach won't
scale.

I'll take the advice to join rhl-devel-list. Thanks.

On Tue, 2003-07-22 at 12:58, Havoc Pennington wrote:
>  On Tue, Jul 22, 2003 at 12:47:47PM -0700, Howard Owen wrote:
>  > How do you propose a package for inclusion under the new regime?
>  > I have an auditing package called sudoscript that's been in contrib 
>  > since 1.0.something. It's now at version 2.2.1 with 3.0 in testing.
>  > I'd like to maintain in RHL. What's the process?
>  
>  Well, that's the catch. We don't have the infrastructure in place yet.
>  
>  We've started by putting up a lot of our internal devel docs on
>  rhl.redhat.com, and moving our devel discussion from internal forums
>  to rhl-devel-list and #rhl-devel. So joining those is probably a good
>  step.
>  
>  The problem is that our infrastructure for all the aspects of
>  maintaining a package is still partially internal.  So over the next
>  months, we will be trying to break down the barriers to external
>  contribution.
>  
>  Right now, to accept an external package we'd basically need someone
>  internal to act as a proxy for you to build your SRPMs, we may do this
>  for two or three packages, but it isn't going to scale at all.
>  
>  Havoc
>  
>  
>  --
>  Rhl-list mailing list
>  Rhl-list(a)redhat.com
>  http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhl-list 
-- 
Howard Owen                      "Even if you are on the right
EGBOK Consultants                 track, you'll get run over if you
hbo(a)egbok.com    [phone]  just sit there." - Will Rogers

[Lawrence Mao]

Well, Xfce did have the latest package in RPM for both
RedHat Linux 8.0 and 9.0 which is nice.  I just hope
that other groups (like Fluxbox or Fvwm) would do the
same to make it easy to install it on RedHat. 
Somehow, I just can't get Fluxbox to work with RedHat
Linux 9.0 even setting up .xsession or .xinitrc. 
Windows-Maker would be nice too since I used it a
little before.

Thanks.

Lawrence

--- Havoc Pennington <hp(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:

>  We aren't thinking of doing this ourselves at Red
>  Hat, but alternative
>  WMs are a prime example of the kind of package we'd
>  like to see added
>  to Red Hat Linux by others.
>  
>  Havoc
>  
>  
>  --
>  Rhl-list mailing list
>  Rhl-list(a)redhat.com
>  http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhl-list 

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

[Michael Schwendt]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 10:40:21 -0700 (PDT), Lawrence Mao wrote:

>  Just wondering whether RedHat or somebody else is
>  thinking about adding other lightweights window
>  managers besides that BlueCurve like Xfce, Fluxbox, or
>  Fvwm!  BlueCurve is nice but I don't need all those
>  bells and whistles.  I want something (window manager)
>  that is fast and doesn't take up a lot of system
>  resources... 
Fluxbox and Openbox src.rpms are waiting in the Fedora package
queue to be reviewed:

  fluxbox - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=487
  openbox - https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=422

- -- 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQE/Hb3r0iMVcrivHFQRAnTuAJ4veusVP8TMEg8ApjZPj6R31DWxqwCfXKpy
> OHICKt7dJAc9KMO0DFDz3lI=
> =FSEw
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----