] >Date Index
Re: [wmx] Why I use wmx (fwd)Robin Stephenson
- Wed Apr 21 11:40:24 1999
>>>>> On Tue, 20 Apr 1999 15:16:12 -0400 (EDT)
>>>>> "Jason" == Jason Smith <email@example.com> wrote:
>> The other problem is session management. I want Gnomified wm2 to
>> use the Gnome session to store window states (position, size,
>> layer, hidden/unhidden) so that when you exit a Gnome session and
>> come back in your apps restart in the right place.
Jason> [...] I never really had a use for this stuff and as a result may not
Jason> value it as highly. I leave my machine on. [...]
Jason> having thought about it and realizing that not everyone can
Jason> afford to do the same, perhaps there is more value to the
Jason> session management than I had at first thought..
Like people with laptops, for example. This probably covers a fair
fraction of the users, what with wm[2x]'s relatively small memory
footprint & low amount of graphical fluff (11" 800x600 screens are
seriously painful with mwm or similar...).
Personally I'd quite like to have the `channels' from wmx integrated
with the Gnome paging system -- then I could use the `standard'
interface that the panel provides, as well as the sooper-31337
top-right-corner special move wmx has. WindowMaker has a very similar
model for desktops -- how does it handle Gnome compliance in this
The other thing I think would be nice, as discussed, is to allow
right-clicks `through' to the root window. That way some other random
program (gmc, whatever) can catch them & provide menus. wmg could
then restrict itself to providing the basics:
Another thing: currently there's a single codebase. Is splintering it
such a good idea? I feel it's getting sort of fractured internally
already, what with the dynamic config stuff, and all those other
#ifdefs, and at some point it's going to become just insanely
complicated & fall apart. Is there a better way of doing this, and
yet still adding features? Something other than the C preprocessor,
...Reducing Crime, Disorder And Fear.