I already told you this is retarded. There is no need to have per-view
client files, the fs design we came up with JG was much simpler,
cleaner, and worked just fine.
One *need* to be able to read the geom information, and that is what
the index files are for. but a geom file per client is retarded and
unnecessary.
Managed clients should *never* take geom commands, the only reason to
export that information in index files is for possible pager
applications.
uriel
On 1/24/07, Denis Grelich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello everyone,
I'm currently thinking about how to implement resizing of windows via
the file system (meaning via keyboard shortcuts). A feature longed for
by many, and causing headaches for quite a long time.
I think about reorganizing the clients, not all clients being managed
under one directory:
/client/<ID>
but sorted by view:
/client/<view>/<ID>
This way of listing is more useful, and it is obvious which frame on
which view is meant when issuing a geom command to the client's ctl
file. (Obviously, organizing the tree this way also means that one ID
can be found more than once in the file tree, but that's nothing bad in
my eyes.)
Another possible change would be to have a geom file instead the geom
command to ctl, so one can read out the geometry. Don't know if that is
needed anyway, I personally don't think so.
Any objections, opinions, or ideas?
Greetings
Denis
