On Sat 28 Jan 2012 01:03:11 AM PST, s.s.albiz wrote:
> Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network
Sent by mistake? A silent protest against WMII or Ruby? Spam?
--
We are governed not by armies and police but by ideas.
-- Mona Caird, 1892
Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network
-Original Message-
From: "Suraj N. Kurapati"
Date: Sun, 1 Jan 2012 21:13:53
To: dev mail list
Reply-To: dev mail list
Cc:
Subject: Re: [dev] wmii falling out of favor
On Sat 24 Dec 2011 12:13:04 PM PST, dtk wrot
Hi,
It was a long time ago. I just loooked at the code.
I think it should work with a few changes. I do not
use these layouts anymore. I first began with wmii,
then dwm. I, of course, missed the wmii ``capabilities"
so I wrote dwmii.c. But, with time, I realized that
moving the windows from column
On 01/08/2012 10:30 AM, John Matthewman wrote:
> I would like a window manager that has wmii's acme-like window
> management, but without the 9P filesystem, wmiir, support for
> configuration via python, ruby, etc.
> use dwm as a base to build upon
+1
I imagine having a stacked layout + manual
On 1/9/12, Thomas Dahms wrote:
> 2012/1/8 John Matthewman :
>> I would like a window manager that has wmii's acme-like window
>> management, but without the 9P filesystem, wmiir, support for
>> configuration via python, ruby, etc. Trim the fat off of it (or
>> perhaps it would be better to use dwm
2012/1/8 John Matthewman :
> I would like a window manager that has wmii's acme-like window
> management, but without the 9P filesystem, wmiir, support for
> configuration via python, ruby, etc. Trim the fat off of it (or
> perhaps it would be better to use dwm as a base to build upon, rather
> tha
On Sun 08 Jan 2012 04:30:47 PM PST, John Matthewman wrote:
> I would like a window manager that has wmii's acme-like window
> management, but without the 9P filesystem, wmiir, support for
> configuration via python, ruby, etc.
Try i3, which was inspired by wmii: http://i3wm.org/
--
If something h
On 8 January 2012 10:30, John Matthewman wrote:
> On 1/8/12, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
>> Someone could implement a stacked mode patch for dwm based on two
>> extra windows (similar to the dwm bar) per column -- wouldn't be too
>> hard.
>
> I would like a window manager that has wmii's acme-like wind
On 1/8/12, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
> Someone could implement a stacked mode patch for dwm based on two
> extra windows (similar to the dwm bar) per column -- wouldn't be too
> hard.
I would like a window manager that has wmii's acme-like window
management, but without the 9P filesystem, wmiir, supp
On 7 January 2012 20:21, wrote:
> But for me, wmii's window managing is far better than dwm's one. I tried
> dwm for eight weeks. Now back to wmii. I like the stagged mode at most.
> I like window titles. I like columns.
Someone could implement a stacked mode patch for dwm based on two
extra win
Am 22.12.2011 schrieb "Suraj N. Kurapati" :
> On Thu 22 Dec 2011 04:36:55 PM PST, dtk wrote:
> > I just cannot see how to do the stuff I feel I need with static
> > layouts. And since I don't believe that manual layouts are what
> > bloat wmii, I fail to understand why I cannot haz them :/ Worse,
On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 05:50:06PM +, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> So long as you have the input state for those commands -- the files
> themselves -- why must we log the output for each and every command?
Error correction.
> If we know the state of the directory, why log invocations of `ls`?
On 7 January 2012 17:26, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote:
> That's not enough. I want the output of all commands (messages, documents,
> calculations, notes and error reports) to be stored on increasingly
> mainstream terabyte disks along with enough metadata to uniquely identify
> it. "Modification" is
Þann fim 5.jan 2012 23:12, skrifaði Connor Lane Smith:
That's not inherent to GUIs, it just so happens that existing GUIs are
extremely poorly made. It's not interaction which needs to be logged
so much as the modification of persistent data -- files and such --
which could easily be logged by
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 11:12:44PM +, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> That's not inherent to GUIs, it just so happens that existing GUIs are
> extremely poorly made. It's not interaction which needs to be logged
> so much as the modification of persistent data -- files and such --
> which could easi
Hey,
On 5 January 2012 14:19, David Tweed wrote:
> I'm not aware of any way of either storing or, more importantly,
> searching a user's interaction with the GUI apps on a computer system.
That's not inherent to GUIs, it just so happens that existing GUIs are
extremely poorly made. It's not inte
On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 7:02 AM, Patrick Haller
<201009-suckl...@haller.ws> wrote:
> On 2012-01-01 21:13, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
>> So I considered the trade-offs between SLOC minimalism, project and
>> community activity, and my productivity in DWM vs. WMII and finally
>> decided to switch back t
You can also use du instead of cd;ls
Overloading simple, old, standard commands is bad for my inflexible brain.
The X11 stuff is way too difficult for me to care.
On 2012-01-02 12:26, hiro wrote:
> I don't understand how this is related to your quote?
Suraj re-evaluated his toolset. I think the re-evaluation part is a good
idea, however it seems you could spend too much time doing it.
> You always execute ls when you cd to a different folder?
in interacti
I don't understand how this is related to your quote?
You always execute ls when you cd to a different folder?
On 02.01.2012, Patrick Haller <201009-suckl...@haller.ws> wrote:
> On 2012-01-01 21:13, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
>> So I considered the trade-offs between SLOC minimalism, project and
>>
On 2012-01-01 21:13, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
> So I considered the trade-offs between SLOC minimalism, project and
> community activity, and my productivity in DWM vs. WMII and finally
> decided to switch back to WMII (which I used since six years prior).
How often do people re-evaluate their too
On 01/01/2012 11:13 PM, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
> Good point. After seeing people take SLOC minimalism further than
> the suckless community's beloved DWM (c.f. MonsterWM), I realized
> that it all came down to *choice* and that I actually had a choice.
>
> So I considered the trade-offs between
On Sat 24 Dec 2011 12:13:04 PM PST, dtk wrote:
> On 12/22/2011 05:54 PM, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
> > I'm another WMII expatriate and I'm still not completely used to
> > DWM's lack of on-the-fly tag creation: especially when some new
> > random task comes up and all of my tags are currently occupi
On 12/24/11, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> I'm not sure a screenshot is necessary. It would just be a fullscreen
> window. :p If you hide the status bar it's honestly *just* the window.
And a border, telling you whether it is focused or not (assuming a
non-zero borderpx).
On 24 December 2011 12:08, dtk wrote:
> 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*
Hah. :) We fold in popular patches, slowly, so dwm doesn't become all
bloated and unstable. My personal v
On 12/22/2011 05:54 PM, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
> On Thu 22 Dec 2011 04:36:55 PM PST, dtk wrote:
>> I just cannot see how to do the stuff I feel I need with static
>> layouts. And since I don't believe that manual layouts are what
>> bloat wmii, I fail to understand why I cannot haz them :/ Worse,
Hey cls,
On 12/22/2011 04:57 PM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 22 December 2011 16:36, dtk 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 de
On Fri 23 Dec 2011 10:24:54 AM PST, Jakub Lach wrote:
> They work day to day in Gnome, then try to emulate it's insanity
> in currently acceptable flavour of the month wm, then brag
> on their home forum with screenshots (arch forum anyone?),
> seeking peer approval.
Touché! s/Gnome/wmii/ and yo
On Fri, 23 Dec 2011 10:34:35 -, hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
I kill dwm when I've placed all my windows correctly so I can save more
RAM.
I actually did that the other day, so I could GIMP my Christmas cards.
Dnia 23 grudnia 2011 11:34 hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> napisał(a):
> I kill dwm when I've placed all my windows correctly so I can save more RAM.
> Everyone who wants more functionality than just placing his windows in
> a perfect way once and for all is stupid.
Words of wisdom!
For ultimate RA
I kill dwm when I've placed all my windows correctly so I can save more RAM.
Everyone who wants more functionality than just placing his windows in
a perfect way once and for all is stupid.
On 23.12.2011, Jakub Lach wrote:
> Dnia 22 grudnia 2011 16:53 Manolo Martínez
> napisał(a):
>
>> The claim
Dnia 22 grudnia 2011 16:53 Manolo Martínez
napisał(a):
> The claim is that when this people finish rewriting dwm then go write their
> e-mails in
> Gnome 3?
> --
That's certainly possible, given compulsive behaviour of tweaking
tweaks.
They work day to day in Gnome, then try to emulate it's
On Thu 22 Dec 2011 02:05:36 PM PST, Jacob Todd wrote:
> On Dec 22, 2011 12:03 PM, "Suraj N. Kurapati"
> wrote:
> > Now that you mention it, I rarely use this feature because it's too
> > coarse grained. For instance, I have tags pre-allocated for
> > particular tasks so viewing more than one of t
On Dec 22, 2011 12:03 PM, "Suraj N. Kurapati" wrote:
> Now that you mention it, I rarely use this feature because it's too
> coarse grained. For instance, I have tags pre-allocated for particular
> tasks so viewing more than one of them simultaneously pulls in too many
> unrelated clients into my
On Thu 22 Dec 2011 06:07:05 PM PST, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 22 December 2011 18:02, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
> > Multi-tagging is cool and useful, but too coarse grained in DWM.
>
> I don't understand what you mean. In dwm a single client can have
> multiple tags, and one can also view multip
On 22 December 2011 18:02, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
> In contrast, WMII has fine-grained multi-tagging (a client can appear
> on multiple views) so I would either (1) choose a client from dmenu to
> pull into my current view or (2) go to the tag I want and multi-tag the
> clients that I'm interest
On Thu 22 Dec 2011 04:57:24 PM PST, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> 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.)
Now that you ment
On Thu 22 Dec 2011 04:36:55 PM PST, dtk wrote:
> I just cannot see how to do the stuff I feel I need with static
> layouts. And since I don't believe that manual layouts are what
> bloat wmii, I fail to understand why I cannot haz them :/ Worse, I
> fail to see why I'm the only one who wants them *
On 22 December 2011 16:36, dtk 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
Somebody claiming to be dtk wrote:
This is why dwm has tags: just don't view the tags you aren't using.
Like you say, tag clients according to their role, and then by
definition those which are not being used needn't be seen. However,
you may be interested in flextile [1].
wouldn't be used to l
On 12/22/11 at 04:47pm, hiro wrote:
> lol, people on suckless don't actually use their window managers, they
> brag about it and rewrite it and rewrite it and rewrite it. It's more
> of a hobby than a necessity for them.
>
The claim is that when this people finish rewriting dwm then go write their
lol, people on suckless don't actually use their window managers, they
brag about it and rewrite it and rewrite it and rewrite it. It's more
of a hobby than a necessity for them.
Hey,
thx for your quick response!
On 12/22/2011 03:49 PM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 22 December 2011 15:35, dtk wrote:
>> I tag clients according to the topic they deal with (yess, I have
>> *several* Firefox windows open on different tags at any given point in
>> time -.-), which is why sta
Hey,
On 22 December 2011 15:35, dtk wrote:
> I tag clients according to the topic they deal with (yess, I have
> *several* Firefox windows open on different tags at any given point in
> time -.-), which is why static tagging with a predefined number of tags
> works really really bad for me :/
Th
On 11/15/2011 06:59 AM, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
> On Thu 10 Nov 2011 09:29:53 PM PST, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
>> wmii is cursed. Its code base has grown by factor 3 or 4 in terms
>> of SLOC, whereas its functionality has stalled.
>
> Thanks Anselm. I think I've held on to the past for too long, an
On Thu 10 Nov 2011 09:29:53 PM PST, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
> wmii is cursed. Its code base has grown by factor 3 or 4 in terms
> of SLOC, whereas its functionality has stalled.
Thanks Anselm. I think I've held on to the past for too long, and
avoided DWM mainly out of disinterest in C. However, a
46 matches
Mail list logo
