On 09/06/2013, at 18:34, Joerg Jung <m...@umaxx.net> wrote:
> Den 9. juni 2013 kl. 17:07 skrev Zé Loff <zel...@zeloff.org>: > >>> please find below a simple diff to add cursors keys to x11/dwm. >>> Objections? OKs? >> >> Since this isn't on the upstream code, > > ... and probably never will be. > >> and since dwm is meant to be >> configured/customized by editing config.def.h > > This is what the patch does. > >> (and built/installed from >> source, > > This is what the port does. > >> instead of installed as a binary), > > So, you want to drop the package, > because everyone is supposed > to compile dwm on their own? No. I'm saying that packages/ports should follow upstream code as much as possible, and the reasons for that should be pretty obvious. I also think dwm is a bit atypical in its lack of post-compilation configuration, so maybe distributing it as a binary doesn't make much sense (I use dwm, but I'll never use the package for that very same reason). What really doesn't make sense is customizing the binary for your personal convenience. >> I'd say this falls into the >> 'customisation' category, and shouldn't be here. > > We already have several of such > 'customizations' in various ports. > Sometimes upstream defaults > are not very useful. IMHO patches on ports should be used to ensure that code compiles/runs/hasn't security issues, not to add (personal) convenience functions. If that is the case, I made a bunch of additions to config.def.h that I'd like to add too. And I bet a lot of dwm users will say the same.
