‎   Steve Litt wrote:‎

> So, if I took dwm, packaged it with the fbpanel
> panel, an fbpanel config tool,

Why would you use fbpanel with dwm though,
the default bar is pretty hackable. Certainly, if
you need a window list, then why not, but since
dwm is a tiling window manager by default
(and most use this mode), your windows won't
be lost.

> the Rox Filer file manager, the scrot screenshot
> utility, the dmenu app-selector, Edward's Network
> Tool (forgot its current name),

ENT then!

> and a custom GUI app, made by me, that acquires
> settings from the user and recompiled dwm
> accordingly

hehe, why would a dwm user need a GUI for this

> (dwm must be recompiled to be configured), and
> a special menu leading to all these addons, and name
> the whole thing GammaRay, then GammaRay is a DE using > dwm as its WM?

No, it would be dwm with all these shenanigans.
I mean, if a project (one project) would make these
utilities, then you can call it a desktop environment.

[...]

> How often do you hear Xfce being called a
> "window manager"?

Have never heard. Because it's a desktop environment,
and Xfwm is its window manager. Xfce project
develops a panel, a desktop, a window manager,
a text editor, an archive manager, a power manager,
a session and all the components share a configuration
system, that is also made by them.

> LXDE and IceWM have pretty much identical user
> interfaces and functionalities, except LXDE has a few
> more peripheral utilities.

And that is what makes it a DE.

[...]

> Heck, even Openbox ships with a system menu and an
> (incomplete) configuration GUI.

Having a graphic configuration tool still doesn't
make a window manager a desktop environment.
Many have - Flux-/Black-/Openbox, FVWM,
Jaysus, even Xfwm and Metacity do, too.

> In this thread, does Xfce qualify? Does LXDE?
> Openbox? Dwm?

Xfce - a DE. LXDE - a DE. Openbox - a WM. dwm
- a WM.

> It's just something to think about.

It doesn't even matter.

/ Mitt