Re: [dev] [dwm] 2000 SLOC

From: markus schnalke <>
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 10:40:48 +0100

[2011-10-31 10:11] Anselm R Garbe <>
> On 31 October 2011 10:01, Martin Kopta <> wrote:
> > Are there any explicit rules which project must follow in order to be part
> > of suckless? What is the line in here?
> I'm working on such guidelines. The main aspects are:

I wonder why we actually do need such guidelines. We don't have masses
of projects to filter. We can simply continue including what we (i.e.
eventually Anselm) consider worthwhile and remove what we consider not
suiting. That makes everthing easier and also we keep our flexibility.
(As we agree that wmii should go, just remove it. Its fans had long
enough time to move the contents.)

Generally, I think, that one success factor in the (early) development
of dwm had been that Anselm just did what he thought was good for
himself. This can be done similarily for Anselm has
shown that he goes for rough consensus.

Instead of adding manifests, we better have real content and let that

> 1. Relevance/Elitism: the project must be relevant in the context of
>'s target audience, it must target expert
> users/developers/administrators and _not_ typical end users.

Why? Are there too many projects in which only few people are

> 3. Quality: the project must aim to be a quality finished product once
> exceeding the 1.0 version number and be maintained afterwards.

Someone already pointed it out. It actually were suckless projects
that did intentionally not care about the meaning of version numbers.

And about quality: Who of us mainly cares about quality? We care about
hackable code! That's important.

> Unmaintained projects will be removed after a grace period of one
> year.

Rules, rules, rules ...

> 5. Exclusivity: the project must be unique, i.e. it should not solve a
> problem that is solved by another project.

Why not?

I suggest to drop the idea of having such a set of rules. We have the
expression of our code and we have a common sense within the suckless
community. What else is the Unix philosophy?

Received on Fri Nov 04 2011 - 10:40:48 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Nov 04 2011 - 10:48:04 CET