On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 10:18 AM, Henrik Holst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 10:40:39PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> I've been waiting for the code movement to slow down before looking at >> it again. Can I just confirm dwm will still technically work linked >> against libxinerama, just doesn't have any special processing for it. >> (As Jimmy mentions, if you haven't got a monitor buying a widescreen >> one makes sense but if you've already got one it's easier to >> requisition/buy another than replace it with a new one.) >> > > Is it really a problem of code being developed? Or is it a problem with > a stable API*, for patches and such? Maybe that is what dwm needs in > dwm-5.x, a promise of a stable api and workflow.
It's partly that over the last 6 months or so I've been incredibly busy and partly that there have been lots of short-lived refactorings (in the sense they then got refactored differently) without much actual core functionality changes, so I didn't really want to spend much time porting stuff again and again. I don't have a problem using a patched 4.4 until things settle down again, and I actually support experimentation with features to see if they're useful. If I had a comment, I'd suggest there have perhaps been more changes to try different code aesthetics on the same functionality which I see as a bit of a distraction. But hey, it's Anselm's wm and he's been dwm writing code lately which I haven't so it's his choice :-) -- cheers, dave tweed__________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Rm 124, School of Systems Engineering, University of Reading. "while having code so boring anyone can maintain it, use Python." -- attempted insult seen on slashdot
