Re: [wmii] summary of some #wmii talk on 2006-03-02

From: John Nowak <>
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2006 16:52:45 -0500

On Mar 3, 2006, at 1:55 PM, Doug Bell wrote:

> As a compromise, how about something I'll call "column memory". When
> the last app in a column is closed, the column disappears so that the
> remaining column gets the space. But, when the next app is started,
> wmii remembers that there was another column, so the app goes into
> a new
> column with the old column's position and size. You would, of course,
> need a command such as "forget column history" when you don't want
> this
> behavior.

This, of course, requires that -I- remember the column history.
Functionality of the WM should be predictable regardless of if I
remember what I did 15 minutes ago. I personally think that manually
clearing column history is far over the top.

> Also, there would be a new column command that works like the
> current snapshots, to place an active app into a new column initially.
> This scheme eliminates many of the negative features of the other
> approaches. Column sizes are maintained after apps are closed.
> Tagging
> of columns is not necessary, since a apps would go into a new
> column if
> the history exists and not otherwise. And no space is wasted on empty
> columns.
> What does everyone think?

I think the column should just hang out there and I can manually
remove it if I want if the only alternative is some creepy column
history I need to manually clear on occasion. At least if it stays
there, I know exactly there I stand. Predictably and naturalness are
critical for any wm. Saving an extra second to kill the column seems
hardly worth all of these additional conceptual complexities, key
commands, and memory requirements of the user.

- John

Received on Fri Mar 03 2006 - 22:52:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun Jul 13 2008 - 16:00:40 UTC