To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
"""In their defense, the article does mention that E17 was rewritten completely from scratch."""
If that's "in their defense" I'd shudder to hear your criticisms.
Yet another confirmation of the valuable truth outlined in this article:
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000069.html
In their defense, the article does mention that E17 was rewritten completely from scratch.
Why? I really shudder when people think it's just OK to rewrite something from scratch to achieve some totally false sense of purity.
Additionally, the person writing this article just doesn't understand the differences between a window manager like shell and a full desktop environment like KDE or Gnome. If you look in Enlightenment you will find no development infrastructure and nothing like kdelibs or slaves. That's what makes a real desktop environment, and you can't just take a window manager like Enlightenment with some cool looking effects and claim it's better than anything else.
Actually that's the very reason for the Enlightenment Foundation Libraries. The EFL is an entire development infrastructure like the kdelibs. This is one of the primary reasons that the development effort has taken so long. They have gone for a new approach of building an entire set of libraries and toolkits and then building the window manager on top of that. This set of libraries and toolkits (EFL) can also be used to build applications designed to seamlessly integrate with Enlightenment window manager.
http://www.enlightenment.org/Libraries/Overview/






Member since:
2006-06-26
I really like Enlightenment... BUT: There seems very little progress. With KDE and Gnome you can really feel how they progress quite rapidly (Gnome releases every 6 months, KDE is almost at 4.0). With E17 et al it is different. Now it's _almost_ at 0.17 - how long have they been with 0.16? Years and years.