Re: [dwm] 9ubuntu?

2007/3/19, Doug Bell <dougb_AT_bellz.org>:
> IMHO, neither of those solutions are very desirable.
>
> When dwm was first written, I argued (unsuccessfully) that it should
> include a simple config file parser. Today, I use dwm all the time and
> like it very much, but I still think a config parser would be a
> worthwhile addition.
>
> I don't change my configuration very often, so the extra compile step is
> not a big deal to me. But it would be nice to be able to get dwm as a
> regular package from my distribution, and it would be especially nice to
> be able to run it from a standard live CD.
>
> Yes, it would somewhat increase the number of stupid questions. But,
> with increased poularity would come more leverage to get non-compliant
> apps fixed. Isn't that a reasonable trade?

I second that opinion. For the simple globals at least, a comand-line
switch or and environment variable can easily be added without too
much LOC. Keybindings and pattern-matching windows could be a bit
tougher and still be in the ".h" file.

For the pattern-matching windows, I thinks that DWM has the
responsability of maintaining a list of broken app and mark them as
such. A separate .h file could be updated for every release pretty
simply.

-- 
Cheers,
  zimbatm