Re: [wmii] answers to IRC comments

On Fri, 12 May 2006 19:45:21 +0200
Denis Grelich <denisg_AT_ueberl33t.info> wrote:

> On Fri, 12 May 2006 18:05:44 +0200
> "Sander van Dijk" <a.h.vandijk_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 5/12/06, Denis Grelich <denisg_AT_ueberl33t.info> wrote:
> > > > The nil-tag view is necessary in the case when /def/rules gets
> > > > blanked or never written (blank by default) and wmiiwm is run
> > > > without wmiirc (just as an example), which is possible actually.
> > >
> > > So set it to a sane value and re-set it when the default rule is read.
> >
> > That's exactly the way it is now. There is no overall 'sane' default,
> > since the default is always connected to wmiirc: If one has bindings
> > for [1-9] tagging in wmiirc, '1' is a sane default, if one has
> > bindings for [a-z] tagging in wmiirc, 'a' is a sane default. Hence,
> > the only sane default is one that isn't connected to any specific
> > configuration at all, such as "nil", "null" or "fallback".
> > Currently, when /def/rules is written, rules are applied to all
> > clients that have the "nil" tag, or no tag at all (assentially
> > resetting "nil" to whatever your default tag in the rules is).
>
> Then I really don't see a problem here. The behaviour is okay, and it is unneccessary to automatically switch to a newly created tag when you are on »nil.« Then GIMP opens up in an not-focused view when it is the first app I start. It's just relevant for the first time I start an app in wmii, it is totally consistent and competely uncritical.

And if you really want to switch to the new tag if you're on nil, it's a matter of one if-clause. Isn't it?