Lionel Flandrin <simia...@gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 02:03:35PM +0200, Julian Stecklina wrote: [...] >> On a related matter: What about an 1.0 release in the mid-term future? >> What would be _your_ wishlist for StumpWM 1.0? > > For one: finish the "float" groups. It's really in alpha state right > now. I don't use them myself but it's already halfway there and it's a > good proof of concept for the new group "abstraction" layer which > would make it possible to use different management modes for each > group.
True. Float groups are useful at times. Personally, I think most of the time using float groups can be avoided by nice placement rules, but then I am too lazy to generate placement rules... > An other feature often asked for on IRC is the ability to have > independent groups per head and not only per screen. I have had the very same discussion with Shawn on IRC, too. My personal problem with the current model is that one cannot create a frame that spans across two outputs. If I remember correctly, the result of the discussion was that multihead support is a hard problem for a tiling window manager and if someone wants to fundamentally change the way it works, he should hack it himself. ;) Regards -- Julian Stecklina The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners - Ernst Jan Plugge _______________________________________________ Stumpwm-devel mailing list Stumpwm-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel
