hiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yes, of course. And this has to be discussed (with a certain "framework" > > of course - you can't come along and expect someone to integrate cairo > > or so). And this is why we have to make clear what exactly sucks less. > > I mean the term itself suggest that we're not developing software on a > > solid basis and have to make the best out of it. > > Yeah, well, we have this framework. We even used to have gods > punishing people who suck too much.
So let the gods speak and rule. > > > Recently there were all these changes with monocle and xinerama; And > > > of course things get more difficult this way, so i would have > > > respected i.e. not including such features at all. > > > > > > Well, this depends on your viewpoint, more precisely what you consider > > superfluous and what not. For some people xinerama and monocle may have > > been a great improvement for a relatively small amount of source code. > > Yes, exactly, this is ultimately dependant on my viewpoint. And it has > nothing to do with whatever it would be an improvement or not. > At this point I have *not* said anything against the feature yet. > > > Well, X11 is a monster and really sucks. All we do here is to tame it so > > it doesn't eat us. We have to make the best out of it. > > Certainly everyone agrees that X11 should be replaced, but this takes > > time and needs people. And because we have none of these resources, we > > have to stick to it. > > I mean do you think GNU/Linux is the holy grail of operating systems? > > I don't really care about X11 and my only real use of GNU is viewing > multiple rickrolling videos at the same time, of course in tiled > windows, non-overlapping. But I care. I just use X11 because of firefox which seems to be required due to society that forces us sometimes to use AJAX websites and similar stuff ;). > > The aim of dwm is to be simple, small and clear, but sometimes you have > > to make trade-offs. And I think in this case multiple monitor support > > was a relatively good trade-off. > > And you are measuring the value of trade-offs in lines of codes. That > does not in any way help objective decisions. Well that's not the only criterion. Mainly I do it more intuitively. > If there is a feature, which one decides to support, probably because > of it's big value, one should not make any more trade-offs but fully > support it. Yes, this is why weed need XRandR support. > This can of course be made in an other branch. That's a problem of Free Software - forking and the resulting fragmentation is god and evil in one person. > The current state is, in my view a really bad compromise (Nichts > Halbes und nichts Ganzes). I agree. > > You don't do polls in fashion - normally it's unconsciously communicated > > dictatorship. > > Fashion is better described with democracy than dictatorship. Questionable. But that's not the point of the discussion. > > Well and in politics (at leat in Germany) you don't do polls very often > > (usually every four years). > > [Just by the way.] > > The results of the polls are still bad, that's also no real point. > > > It works usually that way on the mailing list, doesn't it? > > -9e99 You just have one vote ;). > I don't think so. It's still a discussion you want. I want commented votes (as previously illustrated by example). Regards Matthias-Christian
