Re: [wmii] wmii-4 fs proposal/discussion

From: Anselm R. Garbe <>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 09:40:40 +0200

On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 03:25:27AM -0400, Kris Maglione wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 09:18:19AM +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
> >I don't agree with any exception for floating clients. We have
> >move [+|-]<x> [+|-]<y> and resize [+|-]<w> [+|-]<h> as commands
> >for clients in wmii-4. That works with both (floating and
> >managed clients). The move might be ignored for managed clients.
> I absolutely disagree and I've thought the current behaviour has been
> broken from the start. I don't like to think as columns as a bunch of
> clients and I don't like to have to pick some random client when I want to
> resize a column. If anything, I'd set the height by client, but certainly
> not the width.

I can live with either way. But your approach with
distinguishing columns from clients is different from what
happens if you resize a managed client with mouse... That is
client-driven, thus I decided to also make the
kb-driven interface to be consistent with this behavior.
Anyway, it might be fair to differentiate between the
kb-interface and mouse-interface in this question for managed

> >Also note, that we already decided how to replace the column
> >modes, see the TODO. However I think having a command for the
> >view namespace to set n visible clients for the current
> >column is no big deal.
> Just to clarify, who's we? In every discussion I've
> participated in on IRC, the proposal in the TODO is
> universally disliked.
If Uriel doesn't likes it, it does not mean that it is
universally disliked. 'We' is me and the majority of
IRC-visitors (as well as list members due to discussions).

> I can think of several ways of achieving the effect of
> multiple collapsed clients and the one in the TODO is the one
> that I like least of them all. I'd be *much* more comfortable
> just being to collapse a client to 0 height and being able to
> split the height of a client with the one above or below it.
> It seems to me that the suggested behaviour, on the other hand
> would be, though simple, absolutely unbearable.

The approach being proposed in the TODO reduces the interaction
work of the user to basically navigation. Your approach looks
cumbersome compared to the automatic behavior of the
TODO-approach. I don't want to define specific heights pro
managed client, that takes too much time.

The idea behind the TODO approach is, that the stacking behavior
is polished somewhat more, and it will even reduce switching
modes for most users. Depending on the screen height 2 or 3
visible clients pro time will make the maximization quite
unnecessary and rarely used...


 Anselm R. Garbe  ><><  ><><  GPG key: 0D73F361
Received on Mon Jun 12 2006 - 09:40:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun Jul 13 2008 - 16:09:02 UTC