Re: [dev] uzbl

From: Dieter Plaetinck <>
Date: Sat, 23 May 2009 20:48:28 +0200

On Sat, 23 May 2009 14:19:40 -0400
Kris Maglione <> wrote:

Hi Kris, thanks for your reply.

> On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 08:06:00PM +0200, Dieter Plaetinck wrote:
> >I have only spent little time with vimperator, but unless I'm missing
> >something vimperators idea is adding a vim-like interface to firefox
> >(and other mozilla software). AFAIK it does not change that
> >storage of your bookmarks, history etc is handled internally in
> >firefox, and that you end up with tens of files in your ~, many of
> >which are binary.
> No, it doesn't. I'd be in favor of it, but it would require
> switching over to xulrunner and breaking compatibility with
> other extensions (some of which are too useful to give up).
did you mean switching away from xulrunner? firefox (and hence
vimperator) use xulrunner, no?
May I ask which FF extensions you like so much?

> >The idea behind uzbl is more about implementing the unix philosophy:
> >using external programs/scripts to take care of non-core-browser
> >aspects (think management of bookmarks and such), and using simple
> >plaintext based storage for your settings and data.
> I've actually moved all Vimperator-specific storage to
> plain-text files in the past months. Firefox-specific storage
> (history, bookmarks, etc.) are still stored in sqlite, and
> there's not much we can do about it. Plus, there's all sorts of
> RDF crap I'd like to lose, but, again...
> >We may have (more or less) the keybinding ideas in common with
> >vimperator, but that's where it stops. (unless I'm mistaken about
> >what vimperator does).
> You probably are.
Please enlighten me then :) What does vimperator do more then providing
a vimlike interface?
> >- multiple instance management (like tabs, but better. will use a
> > script that uses a patched dmenu), for those who are not satisfied
> > with the abilities of their WM.
> We talked about this on Vimperator list. I'd prefer wmii to
> manage my instances and to use wimenu for the command line. I
> suggested a separate wrapper program to manage the instances for
> people who aren't satisfied with their WMs.

did you mean wmii9menu ? I'm also a wmii user but I have no wimenu on
my system. I prefer dmenu since you can control it with the keyboard.
(in fact I prefer dmenu-vertical, a patched version from someone on the
arch forums. screenie: (the top menu)

Ideally, I think the WM should handle it all, but i have some ideas
which will use dmenu-vertical for instances management and make use of
some extra application-specific properties. see
for details).

In your other mail you specifically mentioned you are interested in
integration with wmii. Well, me too :) I would like to hear your ideas.

Received on Sat May 23 2009 - 18:48:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sat May 23 2009 - 19:00:01 UTC