Re: [wmii] wmii-3 mean real improvements?

On 5/22/06, Anselm R. Garbe <garbeam_AT_wmii.de> wrote:

> There are reasons why we made the position of the bar (and
> wmiimenu) not configurable. Once people get used to fixed
> places, they don't ask to move the bar somewhere else and this
> reduces some unnecessary code complexity. There are no real
> arguments of having the bar at top or bottom, beside personal
> taste and habit.

Absolutely agreed. I've been a bar-on-top person since my Litestep
days--I like to have it somewhere I can glance easily, and for some
reason, that's at the top for me. As you said, it really comes down to
taste and habit.

> If there were really serious reasons, I'd also be open to make
> it configurable, but I haven't see such so far.

And the patch does work, and it's not hard to set up. (And it provided
a great opportunity for me to learn more about Gentoo ebuilds!
Hoorah!) I understand (as much as a non-developer can, at any rate)
the reasons behind the change, and I'm not disputing it. Just glancing
with nostalgia at the proverbial good ol' days, as a wmii-2 to wmii-3
migrator.

> I recommend using swsuspend2 if you want session support (I do
> it all the days, suspend to disk, wake up and my desktop looks
> like I left it).

Actually, I was more referring to X sessions. I'm a running an
XP/Gentoo dual boot on a laptop (with a graphics driver known to have
issues with the swsuspend2), so I end up rebooting frequently. It'd be
nice if I could tell wmii to save a particular layout for reuse, but
with the new model, I don't think it even makes sense. (I vaguely
remember wmii-2 supporting something similar, but I don't think I ever
used it, if it did. So it's really a moot point.)

-- 
ellotheth rimmwen
* monjoy *