On 23 February 2010 00:16, wrote:
> Submit patches.
Er, ok. i will try
>> - what's the roadmap for fvwm's future?
>> - when will fvwm 2.6 be released?
>> Is there a document to describe this?
>
> Look at the TODO file in the source tree.
i saw this, but is it accurate for the current dev work?
David Chanters writes:
> Hi all
>
> I've noticed a lot of activity with fvwm lately, and was wondering:
>
> - is there a way of improving documentation?
Submit patches.
> - what's the roadmap for fvwm's future?
> - when will fvwm 2.6 be released?
> Is there a document to describe this?
Look at
Thomas Adam wrote on Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 10:11:43PM +:
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 04:33:13PM -0500, Martin Cracauer wrote:
> > Hello :-)
> >
> > Some of you might have seen my discussion on the Xorg list about the
> > classic dual-screen mode effectively being phased out by Xorg (drivers
> >
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 04:33:13PM -0500, Martin Cracauer wrote:
> Hello :-)
>
> Some of you might have seen my discussion on the Xorg list about the
> classic dual-screen mode effectively being phased out by Xorg (drivers
> dropping what they call Zaphod mode), in favor of moving everybody to
> x
Hello :-)
Some of you might have seen my discussion on the Xorg list about the
classic dual-screen mode effectively being phased out by Xorg (drivers
dropping what they call Zaphod mode), in favor of moving everybody to
xrandr for multiple displays.
In case you don't know, this means there is onl
On 21 February 2010 20:23, David Chanters wrote:
> Hi all
>
> I've noticed a lot of activity with fvwm lately, and was wondering:
>
> - is there a way of improving documentation?
> - what's the roadmap for fvwm's future?
> - when will fvwm 2.6 be released?
>
> Is there a document to describe this?
