On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 04:02:59PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 02:24:16PM +0000, Thomas Adam wrote: > > On 22 February 2010 14:09, Dominik Vogt <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > This did not happen before the code change (which does not mean > > > the new behaviour is necessarily a bad thing - it is just > > > different in some situations, and possibly in a surprising way). > > > > Perhaps. I'd had this running for a good few weeks, since this > > subject had come up on #fvwm on IRC more than once in the past. I > > think it's correct -- if a window's layer is changed through a Style > > command, that should be overriding, especially if it is to circumvent > > previous layer change requests from applications. > > > > The wider point is that the layer change via the Style command is a > > conscious decision from the *user*. :) > > Of course. I'm quite unhappy that a few styles have separate > commands that do the same thing but apply only to mapped windows > while styles apply to windows being mapped. Another example is > the "Stick" command. The style "Sticky" however is already > applied immediately. In the long run I'd like to have all the > additional commands removed.
This might be a good candidate for GSOC, and whilst it is only a tiny part of the much larger piece of how we go about structuring code for window state commands/styles, I think I will collate this projecta as a candidate. As soon as I have a wiki page for this, I'll post it here. -- Thomas Adam -- "It was the cruelest game I've ever played and it's played inside my head." -- "Hush The Warmth", Gorky's Zygotic Mynci.
