Re: [STUMP] Flipping heads in group to groups in head!

[Mehul Sanghvi]

On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 17:35, Lionel Flandrin <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> - The mode line: I don't use it myself but it seems it suffers from
>  many limitations for some people (yourself included, it
>  seems). Refresh rate, docked applications and icons come to mind.
>

I use the mode-line.  Its simple, but its functional.  Lets not fix something
that isn't broken.  Yes it would benice to use anti-aliased fonts and such, but
that would be taking away from what makes stumpwm so nice, that its simple
and there aren't distractions.

lxpanel, xfce4-panel, etc all can be used with stumpwm.  I've used
them before.
The problem I had with them was when I was using multiple heads, I would loose
the panel, and then would have to resize the frame to get at the panel which was
hidden somehow.  Also could never get it moved to frame 0 once it got moved to
frame 1, in a two head setting.   Lets get those sort of things fixed, before
turning mode-line into something fancy.

> - float groups: they've always been a second class citizen in the
>  stumpwm world. The abstraction on top of tile-group is nice in
>  principle, but when you try to implement some new group mechanics
>  it's not very convenient and it's hard not to break something. If we
>  were to write stumpwm anew, would we drop float altogether and focus
>  on perfecting the tiling WM, or would we make some kind of a WM
>  "framework" allowing for all kinds of management schemes? Or just
>  allow exactly two distinct modes: float and tiling (I think dwm does
>  that?)
>
> - Builtin menus, messages, mode-line: we can't use antialiased fonts,
>  we can't use pictures; maybe we could rely on some external library
>  (Tk, GTK, Qt or whatever) to do that and not reinvent the wheel.
>

Keep the existing mode-line as it is.  If needed make a separate new
mode-line or just call it mode-panel or something.



Just my $0.02


-- 
Mehul N. Sanghvi
email: address@hidden