One of my pet peeves, that I might be the only one to want (and therefore end up someday, somewhere implementing) is locking a head to a group. So that's one new feature that'd be awesome to have.
- Micke On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 5:25 AM, Scott Jaderholm <jaderh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 5:12 AM, David Bjergaard <dbjerga...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> Anyway, let me know what you guys think. > > > I was very surprised by the suggestion of "no further development" and "In > either case, stumpwm would be done." If that's the direction you want to go > perhaps a separate thread should be created for discussing that since I'm > not particularly interested in utf8 input but I am definitely interested in > that topic and I suspect there are others that feel similarly who might have > skipped this thread. > > I'm very grateful for all the work you've done as the maintainer/developer. > I can understand if you're not interested in further development but only > bug fixes. I assume by freeze you mean of features others implement not just > that you don't personally plan to implement new features. Perhaps though it > would be still worthwhile to have people submitting pull requests for new > features and just accept them to an unstable branch or make it clear that > you're waiting for a new maintainer to step up for new features to be > merged, and see if anyone wants to take over that part of stumpwm. It would > be a shame for people to have the idea that stumpwm is finished or to miss > out on receiving pull requests if in a year someone steps up to continue > development. I think making the freeze conditional (on a new maintainer) or > temporary is better than declaring the project is done. > > I agree a new wm (or major revision of stumpwm) with a layer of separation > from the underlying windowing system is very exciting and I look forward to > it. I can totally understand if you want to use more of your personal time > in that area. But let's not kill enthusiasm for improving the project we > currently have for something that may or may not exist in the future. > > Scott > > _______________________________________________ > Stumpwm-devel mailing list > Stumpwm-devel@nongnu.org > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel > _______________________________________________ Stumpwm-devel mailing list Stumpwm-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel
