berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote: > Le 09.04.2013 00:58, Joel Roth a écrit : > >berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote: > >>Now, I am not using a DE anymore, and also planning about creating a > >>DE based on a tiling WM and minimalistic tools that you can use in > >>keyboard only. > > > >There are a lot of tiling WMs to choose from: > > > >https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Comparison_of_Tiling_Window_Managers > > > >I've been using StumpWM in the default configuration > >and mostly happy with it. > > > >I'd like to know what you're planning to add! > > > >Cheers, > > Ah, a more serious post :) (honestly, I've taken some great fun to > write the one I just sent in reply to Ralf, but at my discharge (is > it the right word?) I was more than 3 hours late at home because of > problems on train... apologies, guys, for the out-of-thread and > probably sad humor :)) > > Yes, there are many tiling window manager. On my side, I am using I3 > for various reasons (the most important one is good default config > and that it's easy to change). > > But a window manager is *not* a "full" desktop environment, and will > never be while we will have no basic tools not duplicating their > job: > * file managers have tabs (even stacking: what do you think are > taskbar?) > * terminal emulators also > * text editors (like vim) often implement their own WM > * browsers (firefox, chromium....) have WM or at least tabs > * ... > > Another problem which forbid us to call a TWM a DE is that they have > no centralized configuration center able to manage the tools which > are, in my opinion, the basic tools we use everyday: text editor, > file manager, file viewer, web browser... > > So we have disparate collections of tools implementing the same > features (window managers, scripting system to simulate a DE -vim is > able to be configured as an IDE, as example-) and with no easy > possibility of synchronized configuration. > > What would I want to add? > Replacement for bloatwares like vim (yes, I guess that it is quite > uncommon to see someone write something like that, but if one > disagree, just explain me why it re implements a window management > mechanism, a copy/paste mechanism and other stuff which are made by > other tools like, for example, screen, and which makes it hard to > use correctly in a X server? For me, a bloatware is a tool which > does things which should be managed by other specialized tools.) or > i3 (the bar it have at bottom should not be managed explicitly, but > by another software, am I wrong?) and a tool to synchronize > configurations (I would like that my system understand that when I > am CTRL+T I want a new instance of the application which have the > focus in a new tab or in a split container, according to my choice, > choice which should be managed by the tiling window manager). > > Do you know what is most funny in my (voluntarily stronger than > needed) words? It is that I am currently using vim and i3, and that > when I speak about them, I am saying that they are good softwares. > I am not lying, but simply thinking 'in the current choice' and 'you > will not find their problems in 2 days'. I am not a vim expert, nor > an i3 hacker. I respect those projects (yes, really, despite my > previous words) for a part of their spirit, but I think they can be > fairly improved, and that a tiling DE could show enhancement they > could receive. > > To understand my words, I think it is important that I explain what > I wanted when I switched to a TWM: > * resource efficiency (which I find for i3, but not vim or uzbl, for > example. It includes screen's space.) > * easiness of configuration (partially found for i3 -but, it lacks > already made tools to replace status bar- , again, but not i3 or > uzbl) > > Also, I've said that people often speak, rarely act (if I did not, I > do so now). I am as most people, never acting, but I started more or > less recently to implement a text editor which could follow the same > model than mpd, since it is the most impressive tool I have used: > easy to configure, does only it's job (even the presentation is left > to another one), lightweight.... > I simply have not still announced it, because.... well, I'm a little > ashamed of the reasons: > * I have no correct financial situation, and simply releasing such a > tool as free/libre will obviously - at least in my opinion - only > maybe give me a potential recognition and no way to eat. Licensing > could potentially give me that possibility.... really sad thought... > * it is not usable in it's current state > * giving the ideas I have for it (not about the features it should > not have, but about features it should have) could burn me by people > more efficient than me (and you are legion, since it's not an easy > task for me) > > When (it will be ready, and when) I will have made it good enough, I > plan to "sabotage" the i3 project, to take a look at it and decouple > the window management system from the bottom toolbar, for the sake > of the text editor I will have made, then write a tool to > synchronize both configurations (of i3, of the text editor's client > I will have made, and probably of some random terminal emulator). > > The idea at first was simply that IDEs (Integrated Development > Environment) are simply specializations of DEs (Deskvelopment > Environent? XD). All of those tools tries to do the same things: to > give a set of tools to do a variety of tasks.
Sounds like you've got a Big Picture(tm) vision to create! For me, the takeaway is i3. It looks like an improvement over twm, fvwm and stumpwm (which I have used) and others that I tried and rejected for various reasons. (I was never attracted to the top-heavy DEs). The screencast[1] explains the rationale for the design decisions, and development is active. 1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnYN2CTb1hM -- Joel Roth -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130409052422.GA2570@sprite