On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 02:14:37PM -0400, Steve Litt wrote:
>
> If that's your definition, then there is indeed a clear line of
> demarcation. And that well may be the definition.

My definition is that a window manager is somethig that interacts with
X useing the protocols X sets aside for window managers (I think that's
speciied in the ICCC or something with similaar initials).

> But in everyday life, that's not how most people define them. How often
> do you hear Xfce being called a "window manager"? Happens all the time.
> LXDE and IceWM have pretty much identical user interfaces and
> functionalities, except LXDE has a few more peripheral utilities. If
> IceWM chose to give a separate name to its window manager component (the
> component that manages and decorates windows), then IceWM would be
> considered a DE, whereas because of its lightweightness and the fact
> that it doesn't give a separate name to its window manager component
> (and perhaps its window manager component isn't a distinct module),
> I've seen it uniformly called a "window manager."

Aren't there two icewms, which differ in that they have different
capital letter in their names? One of which has more stuff than the
other? In the days when I used Debian, there was definitely more tham
one icewm on the desktop/wm menu.

-- hendrik