On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 07:58:06PM +0300, Mikhael Goikhman wrote: > On 15 Aug 2003 15:16:41 +0200, Olivier Chapuis wrote: > > > > On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 02:25:43PM +0200, Dominik Vogt wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 01:17:29PM +0200, Olivier Chapuis wrote: > > > > On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 03:48:20AM -0500, FVWM CVS wrote: > > > > > <snip> > > > > > * Removed the decor for EWMH fullscreen windows, > > > > > > > > forbid shading > > > > > > Why? > > > > If you shade a window without decoration, then you have a 1 pixel > > line. This is problematic, but why not. Now in the case of a > > fullscreen window the 1 pixel line is on the top of the monitor and > > often the offscreen top part of the monitor is black, also there is > > (maybe) the panframe. So it is extremely difficult to unshade the > > window. This may happen with some non fullscreen window, but here I > > get a criterion (fullscreen). However, if you think that we should > > allow shading this is really not a problem for me. > > Maybe if a fullscreen window is requested to be shaded, it is first > un-fullscreened? > > I myself don't see a problem to disallow shading. A normal maximized > window is still allowed to be shaded; and anyone may un-fullscreen and > then shade a window if this is what he needs; or un-fullscreen, maximize > and shade. There is probably no much sense in fullscreen + shade states.
Why can't the user decide whether it makes sense or not? > The whole fullscreen state is to help users (hopefully it is a user who > requests fullscreen, not a malicious program) to keep a window visible. Bye Dominik ^_^ ^_^ -- Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>. To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
