Re: [wmii] Automatic destruction of views

To carry over into Chris Foster's "me too" email :) - this has gone back and
forth for quite a while and I miss the "older" behavior. (at least the
auto-close aspect).

I totally agree with Sander that having to "manually close" tags is more
than just a bit cumbersome. But having the view you're currently using
change to a random one after you close a window can be just as bad.
Sometimes it goes to the next tag (based upon the list of tags in the bar),
sometimes to the previous.

This can be incredibly frustrating with slow loading programs. I have to
use MS Word in WINE (don't ask - at least I can use linux at the office...),
so I'll pull up a filemanager tagged as "wine" (because I sure as hell can't
remember all the parameters to pass) and click on the file to launch Word.
Now, the filemanager is unnecessary, so I close it... at which point I'm
booted back to some other view. Then, wine finally loads and I have to go
back through the keystrokes to retag the new window back to the view I was
just looking at.

It used to be that tags would not be destroyed until you switched away from
that view. So, I have 4 tags, I close all the windows in one of those tags,
I still have 4 tags (although, I'm looking at an empty screen). I don't
drop to 3 tags until I switch to one of those three remaining. Leaving me
the ability to auto-tag new windows in that fourth view if I need it (like
when I'm waiting for slow windows to open, or just trying to clear my head
before starting something new). Anselm removed that (because, unless you
work the way I do, I can see why it wouldn't make sense), but then replaced
it in the snapshots after some discussion. However, the next snapshot
removed it. I miss it.

On 4/21/06, Chris Foster <foster_AT_physics.uq.edu.au> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 01:32:08PM +0200, Denis Grelich wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I find it quite cumbersome that views that don't have any clients are
> > destroyed automatically. Firstly, it adds some unpredictability: you
> > don't know where you end up when your current view is destroyed.
> > Secondly, the current behaviour is quite annoying in that respect that
> > it forces me to re-type the tagname if I accidently destroyed a window
> > or if I want to remove a tag from a window but add another client to
> > that view. If a destroyed and recreated client is tagged by a rule,
> > the current behaviour forces me to go back to the view which is not
> > only ugly but also slows down the workflow considerably. Last but not
> > least, this behaviour was introduced as a means to add some
> > consistency to column behaviour, but actually, there is about zero
> > relation between clients and views?
> >
> > Please revert to the old behaviour.
>
> At risk of writing a "me too" mail, I have to say I completely agree
> with Denis' points on this one... if only to add the weight of one extra
> opinion... The fact that I have to remember to add new clients before
> removing the old ones seems very clunky to me, although the main
> irritation is ending up in a view which quite probably has nothing to do
> with the task I'm currently engaged in.
>
> ~Chris.
>
> _______________________________________________
> wmii_AT_wmii.de mailing list
> http://wmii.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/wmii
>
Received on Fri Apr 21 2006 - 14:56:07 UTC