Hi, Am Montag, den 07.12.2009, 14:34 -0700 schrieb Wirt Wolff:
I strongly agree. Bluetile should be runnable as a self-documenting application not needing ghc to be installed, in fact not even being configurable except through its own interface. As Jan has stated from first design goals: (for its target audience's needs) its defaults should be so usable that there is no need to modify or customize it.
with my Debian maintainer head on: It does not matter much to me whether the bluetile code resides in xmonad-contrib or a package of its own, I can (and will) create a stand alone bluetile binary package either ways.
Thanks for bearing with the long-winded saying of: * Yes I agree they should continue as synced separate projects. * Some of the bluetile server commands should be available from contrib. * There should be a bluetileConfig providing all but the dock and greeter bits from bluetile. As much as possible normal Config.Foo customization methods should work, and any deviations be well documented and include integration helper functions if needed.
The gtk2hs dependency already forces a split, so don’t worry too much about what parts go where: People who want a bluetile-based custom configuration will probably need the bluetile package anyways. Having as much stuff as possible in xmonad-contrib is good, but not critical. bluetileConfig would then come in two variants: one in the bluetile package with the real, full and official configuration of the bluetile binary, and one (“bluetileLikeConfig”) in xmonad-contrib which approximates the bluetile experiences as much as possible without extra dependencies on a bluetile package or gtk2hs. Greeings, Joachim -- Joachim "nomeata" Breitner mail: mail@joachim-breitner.de | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Key: 4743206C JID: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://www.joachim-breitner.de/ Debian Developer: nomeata@debian.org