Here's my take on this ...

I accept CSD is here to stay, and I admit that I've made extensive use of
the GtkStack and GtkStackSwitcher widgets ( which embed tab-like navigators
in the header bar ). However I understand the objection that it leads to
inconsistencies across applications - some have an Enlightenment title bar,
and some don't. It's not like applications on Linux have ever been
consistent across the board. Multiple toolkits, window managers, etc, etc
... this is not a bad thing. Diversity is a strength, and you have to
accept that not everyone will build toolkits, apps, etc, the way you'd like
them to.

For those who object to CSD ... the best use of your time will most likely
be in constructive work to address your issues, within the constraints that
are being presented to you.

People say they've lost functionality. What functionality? In E, you can
right-click on a window and get E's title-bar menu, exposing all the
functionality that you'd get if you right-clicked on a title bar, including
closing and killing applications. I don't see a loss in functionality. You
can also set up mouse+key bindings for window actions - CSD doesn't in any
way remove functionality that E provides.

Both gtk+ and E are themeable. Make some gtk+ themes to make the header bar
look like an E title bar, or make an E theme to make E title bars look like
gtk+ CSD.

Frankly, the solution that some people are pushing for - that E render an
additional border around CSD - is going to look ridiculous, and I can't
imagine even those against CSD would be happy with it.


On Sat, Feb 3, 2018 at 2:22 PM, Marc MERLIN <> wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 02, 2018 at 06:13:50PM +0900, Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> > > So just to be clear, they're going to stop asking E to remove the title
> > > bar? If so, great.
> >
> > the gtk3-nocsd thing makes that happen.
> Sure, but it's a hack. I expect it to break eventually, wouldn't you?
> In other words, it works today, but I'm uncomfortable that E doesn't
> support this natively and I'm afraid the hack will stop working one day.
> > > But either way, E is the most configurable window manager on the planet
> > > I'm pretty sure, so it should really have a way for me to ignore an app
> > > with broken directives that work against what I want and need.
> >
> > the problem is the app still draws whatever it wants inside and that
> ends up
> > looking broken when it also then draws shadows etc. assuming it is
> borderless.
> > it's asking to have somethnig look really broke. the nocsd preload thing
> is
> > a much better.
> I agree that the hack makes things look ok, but I also remember E
> allowing me to draw a border and putting a 2nd title bar around
> google-chrome back it was trying to be borderless for a while
> (thankfully it stopped that a while ago).
> So, I had 2 sets of minimize/maximize/close buttons. That was really not
> a big deal.
> I wanted the E title bar so that I can double click on it and collapse
> (roll up) the window into the title bar.
> Without a forced E title bar, I have no way to do this, and I get very
> sad ;)
> > i can, but i think it's the wrong solution for your problem, and in
> general i
> > think its the wrong solution too.
> It would be a user override for users who care and use cases that
> mandate it. If it's not vizually perfect, no a huge deal.
> On Fri, Feb 02, 2018 at 06:34:14PM +0900, Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> > > Would you please consider re-allowing control of the menubar/border
> > > even if the app says otherwise?
> >
> > also FYI you want to undo fixes to bug reports:
> >
> >
> > so eithr you are unhappy or other people are unhappy.... and
> >
> > where you'll find a screenshot of exactly what will happen if you start
> having
> > 2 borders. a window that looks totally wrong. 2 titlebars with a shadow
> area
> > around the inner area.
> Forgive me if I suck, but I can't see the screenshots in the 2nd bug and
> the first bug gives me
> which
> seems like a broken link?
> > you're going to have to convince other people don't like this happening
> that
> > being able to have this happen is a good thing. if we allow you to set a
> border
> > on borderless windows like gtk ones oyu end up with the above result
> which is
> > far worse than gtk3-nocsd.
> Why would they care? It would be a non default option. E would restore
> the "set border style" option on those windows (where it is currently
> hidden) and let me change the border if I choose to. How would that make
> anyone unhappy since they'd have to explicitely ask for it?
> > your issue in the end lies with gtk/gnome and their design choices. as i
> > mentioned... you won't escape those as time goes on. in wayland it's CSD
> > anyway. and that's the future everyone is moving towards. you'll find it
> harder
> > and harder to fight this, and we will too and it just won't be worth the
> effort.
> Fair point. And how do I get double click roll up there?
> Thanks,
> Marc
> --
> "A mouse is a device used to point at the xterm you want to type in" -
> A.S.R.
> Microsoft is to operating systems ....
>                                       .... what McDonalds is to gourmet
> cooking
> Home page:                         | PGP
> 1024R/763BE901
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites,!
> _______________________________________________
> enlightenment-users mailing list
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites,!
enlightenment-users mailing list

Reply via email to