On 21/06/20 08:25, opal hart wrote: > Suckless software isn't a void separate from the rest of the world,
Suckless software is following a specific set of principles, and the software that sucks is not following those principles. The two are separate. > and > the "suckless philosophy" is constantly inconsistent with its own > beliefs. I will join Hiltjo in asking for examples. > Of all the issues I have with kitty, GPU acceleration is not one of > them. It doesn't matter what issues you might have. It is an unnecessary feature. A terminal emulator is not a graphically intensive program like a game. It is meant to enable terminal I/O. > And display it. "O" in "I/O" stands for "output". > There are plenty of other terminal emulators for systems where it would > be impractical to install kitty. Why would they need to support kitty's protocol? If we are speaking about st, it is a finished program, fulfilling its purpose while not adding unnecessary bloat. > You're on a mailing list for opinionated software to ... complain about > other opinionated software? Not complain, just stating that while most suckless programs tend to respect standards like POSIX, introducing a protocol which is nonstandard to a standards body, for example ISO, by someone unwilling to potentially modify that protocol due to the discussion in the said body would be pointless. > And if anyone > does want to support this protocol, it would be better done in an > optional feature patch or a fork. I agree. However, that was not what Tobias (the OP) called for. It was rather the inclusion of the support for kitty protocol in base st.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
