On Fri, 12 May 2006 13:59:00 +0200 "Anselm R. Garbe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Allowing empty views (at least 1 per time) would at least need > special handling for the nil view, which is the internal > fallback. /def/rules defines the default tag, but without > auto-destroying empty views until a select, one has to at least > auto-destroy the nil view if it is empty, otherwise you always > end up in that view on startup. > Might be a better way for wmii-4. I can agree with the need for > more predictability with view destroying. Even going back to the last used view is not really predictable from a user's point of view. If the user wants to do something else than that what he does on the »last used view«, it breaks his work flow. On the other hand, why is a nil view needed at all? One could start in the view with the default tag, instead in a nil view. No need to apply a rule for the first windows then, and absolutely no need for a nil view. Clean and simple. (I'm so bold and claim that, although I didn't look into the source code ;) Greetings, Denis
pgp8jUBlYcfT7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://wmii.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/wmii
