if any day dwm gets into the no-more-releases state would be nice to provide the patches inside the same tarball/repo and include them in config.h or config.mk.
For me DWM is perfect except for the lack of the append-window patch. But this will be really easy to re-implement thanks to the new redesign of dwm. --pancake > On Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 09:22:41PM -0500, John S. Yates, Jr. wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 11:56:18AM I wrote: >> > Scanning the bundles showing up on [hackers] it is clear that >> > those of us who have any significant investment in dwm patches >> > are in for rough sledding trying to track this refactoring. >> To which Anselm replied with a detailed list of his changes >> explaining that none should be a significant impediment to >> propagating patches. > > Well I have to describe the last step: > > I split screen.c into layout.c and tag.c again. layout.c > contains all arrangement-related stuff (*also new algorithms > like dogrid should go into this file for patches*). tag.c > contains the tag-related stuff like rules, and the view- and > tag-specific functions. This seems more natural to me than > putting everything into a single file. > >> In that same posting I further wrote: >> >> > Will there be appreciable new functionality or is this just >> > gilding the lily? At what point will st get any real >> > attention? >> >> So what is the motivation for this refactoring? Personally > > The motivation is reducing the code, grouping the functions into > more intuitive sets and reducing the amount of exported > functions (only because several functions have been called from > a different object in one place - that was really annoying). > So all in all this also reduces the call graph and makes the > executable slightly smaller than before. Beside the fact of the > new Layout struct being ready for more layout-specific > additions. > > All in all I think that after this refactoring dwm is in a state > that we don't need more releases. I have no request for > additional functionality - it basically fits perfectly my needs. > So see the motivation as final polishing/review. > >> I have much more interest in st reaching a minimal level of >> utility than in a refactoring of dwm that really presents us >> nothing new. > > Hehe, I'm with you, but lack of time at the moment. I delayed st > for several reasons. But its development will go on soon. > >> But an st that we can all help evolve will make much more of a >> difference to the suckless community than an endlessly polished >> dwm. > > Hehe yes. But note that dwm was not written from scratch and > suffered to some extend to design decisions made in wmii, this > has been fixed now. > > The aspect ratio algorithm is going to be slightly changed, > after this I think it will be time for 3.6. > > Regards, > -- > Anselm R. Garbe >< http://www.suckless.org/ >< GPG key: 0D73F361 > >
