On 2012 Jun 09 (Sat) at 13:17:29 +0200 (+0200), Mike Belopuhov wrote: :On Sat, Jun 9, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Stuart Henderson <s...@spacehopper.org> :wrote: :> On 2012/06/09 14:09, Alexander Polakov wrote: :>> > I appreciate that the defaults would stay the same, but really, :>> > what is the point in doing this? cwm can't be everything to :>> > everyone. :>> :>> The point is: when you want tiling from time to time, it's impractical :>> to switch to a tiling window manager. :> :> the basic tiling isn't really a problem but tiling WMs need various :> hacks to cope with the many programs that just *don't work* with them. :> :> part of this is to cope with window layouts which are stupid when :> they're tiled, part of it to cope with programs that plain don't like :> having their windows resized on them immediately when they're created. :> :> personally, I do see benefit to having your diff or something like it with :> commands which can be bound that rearrange windows into certain layouts :> on-demand (though I think vtile would be a lot more useful than htile to :> many people with restricted vertical space ;) :> :> but I think that's far enough; to get cwm to work as a full-time tiling :> WM with window rearranging taking place all the time is going to need :> various hacks which just seem at odds with the basic design of cwm. :> :> :> so +1 for manually-triggered auto rearranging, -1 for turning cwm into :> something which (dwm|ion|spectrwm|awesome|wmii|xmonad|...) already cater :for. :> : :in my very humble opinion what cwm really needs is a nice minimum :overlap window placement algorithm. currently users have to point :the mouse cursor to where they want a new window to be created. :otherwise the whole thing quickly turns into a mess of overlapped :windows in the center of the screen. :
...which is exactly the behaviour I like. -- Experience is what you get when you were expecting something else.
