Re: [dwm] Re: master size for each tag patch

From: Anselm R. Garbe <>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 16:37:54 +0100

On Wed, Feb 14, 2007 at 04:16:00PM +0100, Marek Bernat wrote:
> On 2/14/07, Anselm R. Garbe <> wrote:
> >
> >I got an idea: Don't do it, don't do it now ;)
> >Stick with dwm as is.
> >
> Hm, dwm, as it is now, isn't sufficient for me and my browser + dictionary
> usecase.
> I suppose quick hack will do for now
> (that is, set specific master size when dictionary and browser tags are
> viewed),
> but I am sure there is a way to make this more clean and general.
> And anyway, now that I started to think about this, I am quite surprised
> that everyone is content with only one master size for everything. It just
> doesn't make sense. Or does every one have such a big screen that they don't
> care?

I usually stick to the master default (I rarely use Mod1-{g,s}).
But my resolution is huge:

Maybe instead of viewing the clients you want in a join view,
check if it suffices tagging the dictionary client with more
tags by default (you can use "1|2|3" - the OR in rule
definitions for instance), e.g.

 { "Firefox", "3|4|6", False }


 Anselm R. Garbe >< >< GPG key: 0D73F361
Received on Wed Feb 14 2007 - 16:37:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun Jul 13 2008 - 14:37:09 UTC