] >Date Index
Re: [wmx] Slight menu annoyance (and comments on related stuff)James Ramsey
- Sun Aug 08 18:46:12 1999
--- Lasse Rasinen <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> James Ramsey <email@example.com> writes:
> > It appears that any submenus in wmx's root menu
> lie at the top of the
> > menu. This seems a bit backwards. It would seem to
> make sense to me to
> > put the apps that one uses the most at the top of
> the menu. If one has
> > bothered to put an app in a submenu, that would
> tend to indicate a less
> > frequently used app. Well, maybe. Anyways, I find
> it annoying to have
> > submenus up at the top of the menu, and I hope
> this changes.
> When I coded that feature, it first worked the way
> you mentioned. For some
> reason, the current practice seems more intuitive
> (to me at least), since
> your probably going to have only few submenus and
> lots of programs in the
> main menu or you keep everything in categories. In
> either case, no harm
Oh well. Now that you mention it, I guess I can work around it by
putting a "Favorites" submenu on the root menu or something.
> On related news, I've seen lots of requests trying
> to make wmx have
> everything "civilized" window managers have.
> 1) Dock. There already are sticky windows, so do we
> need two overlapping
> mechanisms? Of course, the suggestion mentioned
> losing the window
> decorations etc. Sticky windows as is don't do
I agree with you as far as the dock is concerned. It does seem highly
unnecessary to me.
> 2) Lots of configurability. Am I the only one here
> who finds some perverse
> joy in having to recompile after every change?
Probably not. However, I find some inconsistencies in what is runtime
configurable and what is not. The pixmap for the border is runtime
configurable, while the color of the text on the window frame is not.
Ok, that means that if I want a dark marble pixmap border, then I have
to change the font color by editing Config.h and recompiling, which
partially defeats the point of having the pixmap runtime configurable.
Frankly, I think a good balance would be to have enough runtime
configurability to customize what can be customized in wmx with a
minimum of trouble, while not so much as to siphon too many resources.
Offhand, I don't think that realistically that really constitutes "lots
of configurability", but I guess that depends on how you look at it.
----I am a fool for Christ. Mostly I am a fool.----
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com