>4. I think the support for floats should be dropped initially and re-worked in >a > different way. If we're going to have floats, I envision being able to > toggle windows between being tiled and floating on top of the tiles. In a > sense making the float group sit on top of the tiled group and being able to > move windows between the two as needed. This would ideally be done > automagically for dialog boxes that often are placed in awkward positions > when tiled.
If we discuss changing the grup logic, maybe we will end up reconsidering the granularity of group choice? I.e., is it worth supporting per-monitor groups? Is it worth supporting multiple «pseudo-monitors» inside a single physical display? What _is_ a group, what is tied to it (windows has a single group?) and what are its immutable characteristics (if we have per-monitor groups, what to do with frame splits, if there are any)? Is a floating group always entire-workspace? Is a floating group tied to underlying tiling group? My setup via frame tagging is most close to 4 no-permanent-splits «groups» inside a single physical display, and one or four more when I attach an external display to my notebook. Should I describe more details about its usage as a use case or is it too weird to consider at the current stage? _______________________________________________ Stumpwm-devel mailing list Stumpwm-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel
