On Fri, 3 Jul 2015 11:17:52 +0000
Eugene Bolshakoff <mercurius@???> wrote:


> > Fvwm's good. Resource light, very configurable. That being said, you
> > must be *very* knowledgeable to get fvwm to work in a way that's
> > conducive to your workstyle, especially if you have poor visual
> > acuity like I do.
>
> I think this is very good to be so configurable, I like this :)

Hi Eugene,

I know for a fact that you're right about fvwm, because I've seen many
people make it into exactly the interface they want, and different fvwm
setups look *spectacularly* different from each other. Trouble is, *I*
have never been able to configure it into usefulness.

I can't be the only one who has trouble configuring fvwm to
productively suit my workstyle. I mean, in certain ways I'm kind of
smart, so I'd assume other smart people are confused by fvwm.

Which means maybe you and I should write an fvwm configuration
document. We would be the ideal team, because I can't get to first base
with fvwm (I've tried for many years), and you operate fvwm like it's a
puppet on a string. Documenting this thing would be as simple as my
asking you questions, you answering them, and one of us writing that
stuff down.


SteveT

Steve Litt
June 2015 featured book: The Key to Everyday Excellence
http://www.troubleshooters.com/key