Hey cls, On 12/22/2011 04:57 PM, Connor Lane Smith wrote: > On 22 December 2011 16:36, dtk <d...@gmx.de> wrote: >> nope, 32 is aplenty. Thing is, in wmii I create them on demand and name >> them dynamically (to reflect their purpose), which conveniently groups >> them as well. I just don't want the tag I do development of project A on >> to be on tag 5. Today. And on tag 6 is a browser with an interesting >> article. Today. But tomorrow, I wanna code on project B as well. Where >> would I put that? :/ It feels just soo static :| > > There's also nametag [1], which allows you to rename your tags at > runtime, and a patch I wrote I could dig up which hides currently > unused tags.
Yeah, that sounds pretty nice. Well, you being so patient with me, I might as well get impolite -.- So, what's the policy here? All future development in patches, so we don't spoil that fancy 2K SLOC statistic everybody is so fond of? :/ *sceptic* >> Sounds weird. That would make for one tag per client then, for most of >> the time I can use only one client (basically) maximised. > > In dwm you can view multiple tags at the same time, which pulls all > clients with that tag into view. (Which is really amazing once you get > used to it. Other window managers just make me feel really > constrained.) yeah, remember that from awesome, rarely used it, felt like a rather clumsy feature over there (might have been due to my key bindings). Still think it's a pity you have to loose that grouping of clients into topics if you need to have several tags per topic. I would like to have my IDE and a browser with corresponding API on the same tag. Purely for tidiness reasons :/ >> I think that is the great power of the >> stacked layout. I can have clients grouped within one tag, but I don't >> need to watch them all of the time. > > That's why I suggested flextile; it has a 'deck' layout. > >> I think so. No way to have one client 'maximised'? > > Monocle layout? Yeah, will have to look into that. Is there a screenshot to be seen? Always associated it with awesome's monocle(?) layout, which was very inefficient as it comes to screen space, iirc. >> What if I need tree columns? > > I don't know what that means. ^^ I'm sorry. s/tree/three/ thx again dtk
