On Fri, May 31, 2002 at 01:37:50PM -0400, Chris Faulhaber wrote:
> On Fri, May 31, 2002 at 10:29:01AM -0700, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > On Fri, May 31, 2002 at 05:47:07AM -0700, Pete Fritchman wrote:
> > > petef 2002/05/31 05:47:07 PDT
> > >
> > > Modified files:
> > > sysutils Makefile
> > > Added files:
> > > sysutils/wmflame Makefile distinfo pkg-comment pkg-descr
> > > pkg-plist
> > > sysutils/wmflame/files patch-Makefile
> > > Log:
> > > Add wmflame 0.60, a dockapp that shows the load average as a flame.
> > How is this different to wmfire?
> For one, wmflame appears to be maintained whereas I have had
> to host the wmfire distfile for over 6 months now due to the
> author's site disappearing. Assuming wmflame does the same
> thing, I will probably remove wmfire in the near future.
IMHO there is no need to remove wmfire, since they are still pretty
different, and frankly, after about a week of running wmfire and
wmflame, I stuck with wmfire as more appealing to my eye ;-)
It seems fair to leave the users ability to decide. As for being
un-maintained, I would not consider this any serious issue unless
we discover some real problems with current version of wmfire.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message