Please clarify the relation between blue and suckless #222

vivien commented 2026年02月05日 18:25:16 +01:00

Hello,
In the README, among the 3 programs you ported to BLUE, 2 of them are from the "suckless" community: dwm and st. Is blue trying to appeal to the suckless developers? They are clear about wanting "a small and elitist" user base (see http://dwm.suckless.org/), so will blue adopt this stance too?

Hello, In the README, among the 3 programs you ported to BLUE, 2 of them are from the "suckless" community: dwm and st. Is blue trying to appeal to the suckless developers? They are clear about wanting "a small and elitist" user base (see http://dwm.suckless.org/), so will blue adopt this stance too?

old commented 2026年02月05日 19:34:36 +01:00

Hello,

I want to be very clear upfront. I was not aware of suckless's political stance
when we selected them for testing. We want BLUE to be accessible to anyone and
I am open to removing the suckless examples once we have other C projects to use
as test cases (WIP).

To answer your question will blue adopt this stance too?. The answer is a formal never.

That been said, the choice of dwm and st was purely practical - they are small C
programs with simple Makefiles.

It is not much, but here is a private email I had with @pastor and @divyaranjan on
that (the quote is my reply):

By the way, I think suckless.org softwares are very good targets to
start with. I suspect that the pattern is simple like this and won't
change much, so we will quickly hit a wall when it comes to determining
missing features. Furthermore, they can be use for end-to-end testing.
I haven't find a way to test the build system other than by testing
Libpatch .. but with easily embeddable projects like ST, we might have
something here.

Furthermore, these packages were already available in Guix, which made it easier
to test the blue-build-system in bluebox by comparing against existing package
definitions: lapislazuli/bluebox#5

Hello, I want to be very clear upfront. I was not aware of suckless's political stance when we selected them for testing. We want BLUE to be accessible to anyone and I am open to removing the suckless examples once we have other C projects to use as test cases (WIP). To answer your question `will blue adopt this stance too?`. The answer is a formal **never**. That been said, the choice of dwm and st was purely practical - they are small C programs with simple Makefiles. It is not much, but here is a private email I had with @pastor and @divyaranjan on that (the quote is my reply): > By the way, I think suckless.org softwares are very good targets to > start with. I suspect that the pattern is simple like this and won't > change much, so we will quickly hit a wall when it comes to determining > missing features. Furthermore, they can be use for end-to-end testing. > I haven't find a way to test the build system other than by testing > Libpatch .. but with easily embeddable projects like ST, we might have > something here. Furthermore, these packages were already available in Guix, which made it easier to test the blue-build-system in bluebox by comparing against existing package definitions: https://codeberg.org/lapislazuli/bluebox/issues/5