Message: previous - next
Month: April 2012

Re: Re: [trinity-devel] Re: Resolving the TWin/KWin Fork Issue

From: Martin Gräßlin <mgraesslin@...>
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 18:42:34 +0200
On Sunday 29 April 2012 17:22:03 Mag. Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote:
> I don't get the point of this prolonged discussion: let's state somebody
> would really want to trade twin for something else, why should he use kwin?
> What's the benefit? As I see it, there's simply no point to prefer kwin to
> e.g. fvwm or openbox.
well using fvwm or openbox is a completely different kettle. Of course you can 
question whether it makes sense to use KWin or TWin at all. A good reference 
for comparison is of course [1]. (Note that KWin is the only window manager 
having a yes in all listed categories)

The Trinity Desktop Environment is a fork of KDE 3.5. KDE 3.5 used as desktop 
shell KDesktop and Kicker and as a window manager KWin. TWin is the fork of 
this version of KWin. Obviously KWin is very well integrated with the rest of 
the desktop environment (e.g. uses same toolkit) and has been developed 
especially for the needs of this environment in comparison to things like 
openbox which is actually a standalone window manager and includes things you 
don't need. Using openbox will therefore result in higher RAM consumption than 
using KWin.

So to me the question whether openbox or fvwm should be used instead of KWin 
or TWin is just invalid.

This means the question is what are the advantages of using KWin over TWin. 
Well I'm not going to repeat what I have written in the past [2].