>> 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? > >I think the fact that a single group spans *all* heads and it's not >possible to switch between groups on a per-monitor basis is a leading >cause of confusion (based on my experience of lurking/helping out in the >IRC room,) and would defiantly be a great boon to the software.
And with modern widescreens, even a sub-monitor groups make some sense. >There are a lot of design questions around interface, and I think the >current functionality might be desirable for some users. > >I think that Michael's tag-based approach to window<->frame association >has a bit too much cognitive overhead (at least for me,) and--while this Yes. Actually, most of the time I use it as an underlying layer for trivial scripts that reflect my actual intent by auto-tagging and chosing frequently-used tags. >is more general than this specific feature--I think it'll be important >to continue to use emacs and screen as a guide for interface and user >interaction models, even if we do a lot of clean up and refactoring >around the edges. Also, we should remember that screen has some annoying limitations. Maybe looking to tmux is also a good idea… _______________________________________________ Stumpwm-devel mailing list Stumpwm-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/stumpwm-devel
