On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 15:11:46 -0500 Kurt H Maier <karmaf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Nothing, except it's completely opposed to the fundamental concept of > dwm. You do not have a per-tag layout. You have a layout. Be that as it may, but in terms of usability for me I prefer the per-tag layout as some programs I need to have the bstack layout, others monocle and others again tiled. As I need the programs running at the same time to do my work, it is counterproductive to have to rearrange the tag layout every time I have to switch to another tag. > All layout-per-tag essentially does is move dwm from being a > tagged-client window manager to a tagged-workspace window manager. > The former makes sense and can be implemented in a sane way, the > latter requires more complexity and edge-case handling in the code, > and nobody here wants that. So what you are saying is that if a problem is making the code more complex one define that this is not a problem and ignore it? It is like saying all chemical/physical models should be ideal and sod the real world if the simulations don't add up to reality. What I want is not the smallest neatest code that doesn't model the problem-space and is semi-usable. That is not a suckless code (well except for the programmer) This said I'm perfectly happy with having patches that add the per-tag functionality. Regards, Preben
