Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!ucbvax!cartan!weyl.Berkeley.EDU!rusty
From: rusty@weyl.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.windows.x
Subject: Re:  Uwm extensions, perhaps?
Message-ID: <1024@cartan.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: Mon, 23-Feb-87 14:44:43 EST
Article-I.D.: cartan.1024
Posted: Mon Feb 23 14:44:43 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 26-Feb-87 20:32:11 EST
References: <8702211303.AA01735@gjetost.wisc.edu>
Sender: daemon@cartan.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: rusty@weyl.Berkeley.EDU (Rusty Wright)
Organization: Math Dept. UC Berkeley
Lines: 21

In article <8702211303.AA01735@gjetost.wisc.edu> solomon@GJETOST.WISC.EDU (Marvin Solomon) writes:
>...
>
>What's the solution?  I think it is to get rid of the idea of window
>manager as a separate process, and build "window-manager" functions
>into all windows.

That scares me.  Wouldn't we then have the problem that suntools has
where the suntool binaries are huge?  On my sun 3/50 the suntools
program itself is 728 blocks and the various other tools that run
under suntools are 952 blocks.  Yuck.

How about setting up some sort of standard?  For example, all window
managers must use control+shift when the mouse is in a window or an
icon, and when it's in the background the control+shift is optional.

--------------------------------------

	rusty c. wright
	rusty@weyl.berkeley.edu
	ucbvax!weyl!rusty