New mailing list. Was Re: [dwm] musca wm
I suggested a while ago to merge wmii@ and dwm@ into hackers@, both lists are rather low level, and there is much overlap, and such a single list would be more fitting for new minor side projects and for 'offtopic' discussion. Right now when one has something to say that doesn't quite fit in wmii@ or dwm@, or that could fit in both, you have to pick one list at random, or to cross post, and both options suck. Peace uriel What do you think about creating an offtopic mailing list in suckless for discussing such kind of topics, instead of using the dwm@ one like nowadays happen. I think it's been the charme of dwm@ to discuss lot's of other things, so I'd rather keep it as it is for now ;) Kind regards, Anselm
[dwm] Re: New mailing list
[2009-05-20 08:35] Uriel urie...@gmail.com I suggested a while ago to merge wmii@ and dwm@ into hackers@, both lists are rather low level, and there is much overlap, and such a single list would be more fitting for new minor side projects and for 'offtopic' discussion. +1 Right now when one has something to say that doesn't quite fit in wmii@ or dwm@, or that could fit in both, you have to pick one list at random, or to cross post, and both options suck. What do you think about creating an offtopic mailing list in suckless for discussing such kind of topics, instead of using the dwm@ one like nowadays happen. I think it's been the charme of dwm@ to discuss lot's of other things, Yes. Merge, don't split. meillo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: New mailing list. Was Re: [dwm] musca wm
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Uriel urie...@gmail.com wrote: I suggested a while ago to merge wmii@ and dwm@ into hackers@, both lists are rather low level, and there is much overlap, and such a single list would be more fitting for new minor side projects and for 'offtopic' discussion. I hope I am not alone in wishing that the users from the wmii list never make it into the dwm list. -- Samuel 'Shardz' Baldwin - staticfree.info/~samuel
Re: New mailing list. Was Re: [dwm] musca wm
Greetings. Uriel wrote: I suggested a while ago to merge wmii@ and dwm@ into hackers@, both lists are rather low level, and there is much overlap, and such a single list would be more fitting for new minor side projects and for 'offtopic' discussion. There is a philosophical distraction between wmii and dwm. I wouldn't recommend a merge of both. Right now when one has something to say that doesn't quite fit in wmii@ or dwm@, or that could fit in both, you have to pick one list at random, or to cross post, and both options suck. Wmii still exists? Didn't it die a while ago, when arg left its development? Sincerely, Christoph Lohmann
Re: [dwm] nanox
Hi pancake, 2009/5/19 pancake panc...@youterm.com: I have been looking a bit for an alternative for X11, and I found nano-X quite interesting, but it is currently an abandoned project. 8000 LOCs, there's an abstraction library to wrap libX11 and there's support for some many IO devices (tty, gpm, ..) It runs directly writing on fb0, but it shouldnt be hard to make it run as Xnest (for testing purposes) or draw a xorg-driver layer to directly run with native graphics drivers. The source looks quite clean and I think we can use it as base for the minimal X replacement. ARG, what do you think about this? :) I'm looking at it and must confess it could be some starting point. There's little movement in the mailing list nowadays, but the last release is from 1999. So I can think that the project is dead. Here's the last release of nanox (0.4) http://www.tucows.com/download.html?software_id=9833t=2 Actually the project has grown and it was renamed to microwindows which has become a much bigger project: ( iwas unable to compile it because of the outdated dependency against freetype (v1) ) ftp://microwindows.censoft.com/pub/microwindows/microwindows-full-0.91.tar.gz (10MB) this tarball contains nanox (but depends on freetype and such) and now is 16KLOC Official website: http://www.microwindows.org/ Thanks and kind regards, Anselm
Re: [dwm] nanox
2009/5/20 Jacob Todd jaketodd...@gmail.com: On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 04:08:07PM +0200, pancake wrote: Seems interesting, but instead of reinventing the wheel, why don't we just clean up X.org and submit patches back upstream? Rewriting/implementing X.org seems li ke more work than it's worth, but cleaning up Xorg would be better for everyone. Unfortunately that's not my intention. I have a completely new WS in mind, design-wise with no X dependency, just an X legacy support layer instead. The crucial part of X imho is the hardware support, that's why I want to stick to xorg-drivers*, just because that's the bit which can't be done properly without driver experts. X.org can't be fixed because it consists of all the X10 and X11 legacy we don't want to carry on in a new WS, we want a different WS, not a state-machine WS like X. And X.org won't be willing to accept patches which change its internal behavior radically. Kind regards, Anselm
Re: [dwm] Re: New mailing list
I think that's a sensible proposal, let's do it. For those who are subscribed already, there won't be a difference. The new ones will subscribe to hackers. We will keep dwm@ and wmii@ working, but direct it to hack...@. Kind regards, Anselm 2009/5/20 markus schnalke mei...@marmaro.de: [2009-05-20 08:35] Uriel urie...@gmail.com I suggested a while ago to merge wmii@ and dwm@ into hackers@, both lists are rather low level, and there is much overlap, and such a single list would be more fitting for new minor side projects and for 'offtopic' discussion. +1 Right now when one has something to say that doesn't quite fit in wmii@ or dwm@, or that could fit in both, you have to pick one list at random, or to cross post, and both options suck. What do you think about creating an offtopic mailing list in suckless for discussing such kind of topics, instead of using the dwm@ one like nowadays happen. I think it's been the charme of dwm@ to discuss lot's of other things, Yes. Merge, don't split. meillo -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFKE6ly6aFpZ+X9qBIRArW7AJ4sXPrq+pagoWmS2AKT032PSmqOTQCfXsgx b3yhcxM+v9dwI/Mo9IklZHU= =OWPz -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [dwm] Re: New mailing list
Ok, I meant the following: Let's have hackers@ be some meta list which sends to dwm@ and wmii@, and those subscribed to hackers will receive dwm@ and w...@. Those who are only interested in dwm@ or wmii@ specifically could just stay on dwm@ resp. w...@. That should be technically possible. Kind regards, Anselm 2009/5/20 Anselm R Garbe garb...@gmail.com: I think that's a sensible proposal, let's do it. For those who are subscribed already, there won't be a difference. The new ones will subscribe to hackers. We will keep dwm@ and wmii@ working, but direct it to hack...@. Kind regards, Anselm 2009/5/20 markus schnalke mei...@marmaro.de: [2009-05-20 08:35] Uriel urie...@gmail.com I suggested a while ago to merge wmii@ and dwm@ into hackers@, both lists are rather low level, and there is much overlap, and such a single list would be more fitting for new minor side projects and for 'offtopic' discussion. +1 Right now when one has something to say that doesn't quite fit in wmii@ or dwm@, or that could fit in both, you have to pick one list at random, or to cross post, and both options suck. What do you think about creating an offtopic mailing list in suckless for discussing such kind of topics, instead of using the dwm@ one like nowadays happen. I think it's been the charme of dwm@ to discuss lot's of other things, Yes. Merge, don't split. meillo -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFKE6ly6aFpZ+X9qBIRArW7AJ4sXPrq+pagoWmS2AKT032PSmqOTQCfXsgx b3yhcxM+v9dwI/Mo9IklZHU= =OWPz -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [dwm] Re: New mailing list
Hi, 2009/5/20 Szabolcs Nagy nszabo...@gmail.com: On 5/20/09, Anselm R Garbe garb...@gmail.com wrote: Let's have hackers@ be some meta list which sends to dwm@ and wmii@, and those subscribed to hackers will receive dwm@ and w...@. Those who are only interested in dwm@ or wmii@ specifically could just stay on dwm@ resp. w...@. That should be technically possible. dwm, wmii - hackers hackers - dwm, wmii so one sends a mail to dwm@ then it goes to hackers@ then someone replies there and the reply goes to w...@? imho if we merge then don't keep separate dwm and wmii lists if there are too many commits then commit messages may be separated from discussions Well, let's have one list then as you propose and see how we get on. I like to see the commits side by side. Because so far there were nearly 0 discussions regarding commits, but we had plenty on dwm@ about patches. Still, the traffic won't go up like hell. Kind regards, Anselm
Re: [dwm] Re: New mailing list
On (20/05/09 10:04), Anselm R Garbe wrote: To: dwm mail list dwm@suckless.org, wmii mail list w...@suckless.org From: Anselm R Garbe garb...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [dwm] Re: New mailing list Reply-To: dwm mail list dwm@suckless.org List-Id: dwm mail list dwm.suckless.org Ok, I meant the following: Let's have hackers@ be some meta list which sends to dwm@ and wmii@, and those subscribed to hackers will receive dwm@ and w...@. Those who are only interested in dwm@ or wmii@ specifically could just stay on dwm@ resp. w...@. That should be technically possible. Kind regards, Anselm Don't forget that hackers@ receive commit emails, imho leave it as is or join all into one ml. Idea for having one ml as sort of syndication ml imho sux :), if someone wants to receive/send both ml, he/she can subscribe/cc them. -Ph -- Premysl Anydot Hruby, http://www.redrum.cz/ - I'm a signature virus. Please add me to your signature and help me spread!
Re: [dwm] Re: New mailing list
2009/5/20 Premysl Hruby dfe...@gmail.com: On (20/05/09 10:04), Anselm R Garbe wrote: To: dwm mail list dwm@suckless.org, wmii mail list w...@suckless.org From: Anselm R Garbe garb...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [dwm] Re: New mailing list Reply-To: dwm mail list dwm@suckless.org List-Id: dwm mail list dwm.suckless.org Ok, I meant the following: Let's have hackers@ be some meta list which sends to dwm@ and wmii@, and those subscribed to hackers will receive dwm@ and w...@. Those who are only interested in dwm@ or wmii@ specifically could just stay on dwm@ resp. w...@. That should be technically possible. Kind regards, Anselm Don't forget that hackers@ receive commit emails, imho leave it as is or join all into one ml. Idea for having one ml as sort of syndication ml imho sux :), if someone wants to receive/send both ml, he/she can subscribe/cc them. If commit messages become a problem, we can move them to hglog@ Kind regards, Anselm
Re: [dwm] Re: New mailing list
2009/5/20 Szabolcs Nagy nszabo...@gmail.com: On 5/20/09, Anselm R Garbe garb...@gmail.com wrote: Let's have hackers@ be some meta list which sends to dwm@ and wmii@, and those subscribed to hackers will receive dwm@ and w...@. Those who are only interested in dwm@ or wmii@ specifically could just stay on dwm@ resp. w...@. That should be technically possible. dwm, wmii - hackers hackers - dwm, wmii so one sends a mail to dwm@ then it goes to hackers@ then someone replies there and the reply goes to w...@? Maybe I'm being naive, mailing lists are not my strong point. But IMO you can send the messages to the people subscribed to hackers with the corresponding FROM: field (dwm or wmii). So, if one sends a mail to dwm, you recive it as coming from dwm. Since hackers subscribed recive mail from both lists, the reply will arrive to dwm and hackers subscribers. Only if you specifically send an email to hackers it will be received by both lists (and you could, for example, change the TO: field when the discussion goes off-topic). Maybe somebody knows if I'm right or absolutely wrong. -- - yiyus || JGL .
Re: [dwm] Re: New mailing list
2009/5/20 yy yiyu@gmail.com: 2009/5/20 Szabolcs Nagy nszabo...@gmail.com: On 5/20/09, Anselm R Garbe garb...@gmail.com wrote: Let's have hackers@ be some meta list which sends to dwm@ and wmii@, and those subscribed to hackers will receive dwm@ and w...@. Those who are only interested in dwm@ or wmii@ specifically could just stay on dwm@ resp. w...@. That should be technically possible. dwm, wmii - hackers hackers - dwm, wmii so one sends a mail to dwm@ then it goes to hackers@ then someone replies there and the reply goes to w...@? Maybe I'm being naive, mailing lists are not my strong point. But IMO you can send the messages to the people subscribed to hackers with the corresponding FROM: field (dwm or wmii). So, if one sends a mail to dwm, you recive it as coming from dwm. Since hackers subscribed recive mail from both lists, the reply will arrive to dwm and hackers subscribers. Only if you specifically send an email to hackers it will be received by both lists (and you could, for example, change the TO: field when the discussion goes off-topic). Maybe somebody knows if I'm right or absolutely wrong. That's possible, though in reality people will reply to dwm@ or wmii@ and the others won't see it, which is why having one list to keep track of the discussions is better, where dwm@ and wmii@ are aliases for the same. In the beginning I'd even go that far to have the commit logs on that list as well. Kind regards, Anselm
Re: [dwm] Re: New mailing list
The problem is not dwm@ and wmii@, the problem is all the other stuff that is unrelated to either, the only two logical and consistent options are to either we further split the community into st@ dws@ and so on, or we merge everything, and I think that option is a no-brainer. uriel On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 11:46 AM, Premysl Hruby dfe...@gmail.com wrote: On (20/05/09 11:34), yy wrote: To: dwm mail list dwm@suckless.org From: yy yiyu@gmail.com Subject: Re: [dwm] Re: New mailing list Reply-To: dwm mail list dwm@suckless.org List-Id: dwm mail list dwm.suckless.org 2009/5/20 Szabolcs Nagy nszabo...@gmail.com: On 5/20/09, Anselm R Garbe garb...@gmail.com wrote: Let's have hackers@ be some meta list which sends to dwm@ and wmii@, and those subscribed to hackers will receive dwm@ and w...@. Those who are only interested in dwm@ or wmii@ specifically could just stay on dwm@ resp. w...@. That should be technically possible. dwm, wmii - hackers hackers - dwm, wmii so one sends a mail to dwm@ then it goes to hackers@ then someone replies there and the reply goes to w...@? Maybe I'm being naive, mailing lists are not my strong point. But IMO you can send the messages to the people subscribed to hackers with the corresponding FROM: field (dwm or wmii). So, if one sends a mail to dwm, you recive it as coming from dwm. Since hackers subscribed recive mail from both lists, the reply will arrive to dwm and hackers subscribers. Only if you specifically send an email to hackers it will be received by both lists (and you could, for example, change the TO: field when the discussion goes off-topic). Maybe somebody knows if I'm right or absolutely wrong. -- - yiyus || JGL . Well, or you can just simply post to both dwm@ and wmii@ :) (for example, both in to: of email). Whole this discussion is all but not suckless :) -- Premysl Anydot Hruby, http://www.redrum.cz/ - I'm a signature virus. Please add me to your signature and help me spread!
Re: [dwm] Re: New mailing list
2009/5/20 Uriel urie...@gmail.com: The problem is not dwm@ and wmii@, the problem is all the other stuff that is unrelated to either, the only two logical and consistent options are to either we further split the community into st@ dws@ and so on, or we merge everything, and I think that option is a no-brainer. I agree with that, though I think we should introduce a new list. Here is what we will do: We'll keep hackers@ as is -- just commit logs. We will introduce d...@suckless.org which merges dwm@ and wmii@ into one list, and dwm@ and wmii@ will be aliases for that. On IRC we already formed #suckless @ oftc.net Kind regards, Anselm
Re: [dwm] Re: New mailing list
On (20/05/09 11:53), Uriel wrote: To: dwm mail list dwm@suckless.org From: Uriel urie...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [dwm] Re: New mailing list Reply-To: dwm mail list dwm@suckless.org List-Id: dwm mail list dwm.suckless.org The problem is not dwm@ and wmii@, the problem is all the other stuff that is unrelated to either, the only two logical and consistent options are to either we further split the community into st@ dws@ and so on, or we merge everything, and I think that option is a no-brainer. uriel Well, as I said in earlier email, I'm not against merge-all-in-on, I just dislike idea of having hackers@ as sort of alias send to all etc. I even think that having only one ml for all (wmii+dwm+commit mails+other) would be fine for all of us. -Ph -- Premysl Anydot Hruby, http://www.redrum.cz/ - I'm a signature virus. Please add me to your signature and help me spread!
Re: [dwm] Irc channel moved
On 5/20/09, Uriel urie...@gmail.com wrote: For simplicity and consistency #dwm and #wmii have moved to #hackers. Still in the oftc network. #suckless
Re: [dwm] Irc channel moved
#dev On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 12:08 PM, Szabolcs Nagy nszabo...@gmail.com wrote: On 5/20/09, Uriel urie...@gmail.com wrote: For simplicity and consistency #dwm and #wmii have moved to #hackers. Still in the oftc network. #suckless
Re: [dwm] Irc channel moved
On Wed, 20 May 2009 12:08:28 +0200 Szabolcs Nagy nszabo...@gmail.com wrote: On 5/20/09, Uriel urie...@gmail.com wrote: For simplicity and consistency #dwm and #wmii have moved to #hackers. Still in the oftc network. #suckless #suckless is probably the best. #hackers will attract wrong kids and does not describe anything.
Re: [dwm] Irc channel moved
2009/5/20 Dusan ef_...@yahoo.com: #suckless is probably the best. #hackers will attract wrong kids and does not describe anything. The agreed channel name is #suckless. Period. Kind regards, Anselm
Re: [dwm] nanox
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 09:53:30AM +0100, Anselm R Garbe wrote: 2009/5/20 Jacob Todd jaketodd...@gmail.com: On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 04:08:07PM +0200, pancake wrote: Seems interesting, but instead of reinventing the wheel, why don't we just clean up X.org and submit patches back upstream? Rewriting/implementing X.org seems li ke more work than it's worth, but cleaning up Xorg would be better for everyone. Unfortunately that's not my intention. I have a completely new WS in mind, design-wise with no X dependency, just an X legacy support layer instead. The crucial part of X imho is the hardware support, that's why I want to stick to xorg-drivers*, just because that's the bit which can't be done properly without driver experts. X.org can't be fixed because it consists of all the X10 and X11 legacy we don't want to carry on in a new WS, we want a different WS, not a state-machine WS like X. And X.org won't be willing to accept patches which change its internal behavior radically. Kind regards, Anselm Before; for some odd reason, I was thinking you (we?) wanted to drop legacy X11 support and just start completely over. Now that I know there's legacy support this seems like a good idea.
Re: [dwm] nanox
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 4:53 AM, Anselm R Garbe garb...@gmail.com wrote: I have a completely new WS in mind, design-wise with no X dependency, just an X legacy support layer instead. ... , we want a different WS, not a state-machine WS like X. Do you envision including xcb style asynchrony? /john
[dwm] dmenu + xft
Attached is a patch adding xft support to dmenu 4.0. I claim no copyright as it is little more than mimicing patterns I found in Alexander Polakov's 3.4 patch and Robert Manea's dzen xft support. I have attempted to follow the suckless paradigm as much as possible (e.g. config.mk). xft support is optional and when it is enabled it does not remove classic x11 fonts (as Alexander Polakov's patch did). An xft font specification is recognized by the presence of a xft: prefix; anything else is treated as classic x11. Other changes: I removed support for a selected foreground color as dmenu never actually used it. This allowed the width of the help message to remain unchanged when I added a -bh (bar height) option. This option is orthogonal to xft support. Motivation for bar height is covered in my recent Some Gnome fit and finish work posting to the xmonad mail list. Ideally I would like to see this patch included in dmenu so that in time it can become part of main stream distributions. If there is no chance of that happening then what is the proper place at suckless.org to post the patch? /johnin dmenu-4.0-xft.diff Description: Binary data
