Re: Tiling window manager based desktop environment (was: Re: MICROSOFT HIRED THESE PEOPLE TO SABOTAGE OPEN SOURCE)
berenger.morel@neutralite.org wrote:
> Le 09.04.2013 00:58, Joel Roth a écrit :
> >berenger.morel@neutralite.org wrote:
> >>Now, I am not using a DE anymore, and also planning about creating a
> >>DE based on a tiling WM and minimalistic tools that you can use in
> >>keyboard only.
> >
> >There are a lot of tiling WMs to choose from:
> >
> >https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Comparison_of_Tiling_Window_Managers
> >
> >I've been using StumpWM in the default configuration
> >and mostly happy with it.
> >
> >I'd like to know what you're planning to add!
> >
> >Cheers,
>
> Ah, a more serious post :) (honestly, I've taken some great fun to
> write the one I just sent in reply to Ralf, but at my discharge (is
> it the right word?) I was more than 3 hours late at home because of
> problems on train... apologies, guys, for the out-of-thread and
> probably sad humor :))
>
> Yes, there are many tiling window manager. On my side, I am using I3
> for various reasons (the most important one is good default config
> and that it's easy to change).
>
> But a window manager is *not* a "full" desktop environment, and will
> never be while we will have no basic tools not duplicating their
> job:
> * file managers have tabs (even stacking: what do you think are
> taskbar?)
> * terminal emulators also
> * text editors (like vim) often implement their own WM
> * browsers (firefox, chromium....) have WM or at least tabs
> * ...
>
> Another problem which forbid us to call a TWM a DE is that they have
> no centralized configuration center able to manage the tools which
> are, in my opinion, the basic tools we use everyday: text editor,
> file manager, file viewer, web browser...
>
> So we have disparate collections of tools implementing the same
> features (window managers, scripting system to simulate a DE -vim is
> able to be configured as an IDE, as example-) and with no easy
> possibility of synchronized configuration.
>
> What would I want to add?
> Replacement for bloatwares like vim (yes, I guess that it is quite
> uncommon to see someone write something like that, but if one
> disagree, just explain me why it re implements a window management
> mechanism, a copy/paste mechanism and other stuff which are made by
> other tools like, for example, screen, and which makes it hard to
> use correctly in a X server? For me, a bloatware is a tool which
> does things which should be managed by other specialized tools.) or
> i3 (the bar it have at bottom should not be managed explicitly, but
> by another software, am I wrong?) and a tool to synchronize
> configurations (I would like that my system understand that when I
> am CTRL+T I want a new instance of the application which have the
> focus in a new tab or in a split container, according to my choice,
> choice which should be managed by the tiling window manager).
>
> Do you know what is most funny in my (voluntarily stronger than
> needed) words? It is that I am currently using vim and i3, and that
> when I speak about them, I am saying that they are good softwares.
> I am not lying, but simply thinking 'in the current choice' and 'you
> will not find their problems in 2 days'. I am not a vim expert, nor
> an i3 hacker. I respect those projects (yes, really, despite my
> previous words) for a part of their spirit, but I think they can be
> fairly improved, and that a tiling DE could show enhancement they
> could receive.
>
> To understand my words, I think it is important that I explain what
> I wanted when I switched to a TWM:
> * resource efficiency (which I find for i3, but not vim or uzbl, for
> example. It includes screen's space.)
> * easiness of configuration (partially found for i3 -but, it lacks
> already made tools to replace status bar- , again, but not i3 or
> uzbl)
>
> Also, I've said that people often speak, rarely act (if I did not, I
> do so now). I am as most people, never acting, but I started more or
> less recently to implement a text editor which could follow the same
> model than mpd, since it is the most impressive tool I have used:
> easy to configure, does only it's job (even the presentation is left
> to another one), lightweight....
> I simply have not still announced it, because.... well, I'm a little
> ashamed of the reasons:
> * I have no correct financial situation, and simply releasing such a
> tool as free/libre will obviously - at least in my opinion - only
> maybe give me a potential recognition and no way to eat. Licensing
> could potentially give me that possibility.... really sad thought...
> * it is not usable in it's current state
> * giving the ideas I have for it (not about the features it should
> not have, but about features it should have) could burn me by people
> more efficient than me (and you are legion, since it's not an easy
> task for me)
>
> When (it will be ready, and when) I will have made it good enough, I
> plan to "sabotage" the i3 project, to take a look at it and decouple
> the window management system from the bottom toolbar, for the sake
> of the text editor I will have made, then write a tool to
> synchronize both configurations (of i3, of the text editor's client
> I will have made, and probably of some random terminal emulator).
>
> The idea at first was simply that IDEs (Integrated Development
> Environment) are simply specializations of DEs (Deskvelopment
> Environent? XD). All of those tools tries to do the same things: to
> give a set of tools to do a variety of tasks.
Sounds like you've got a Big Picture(tm) vision to create!
For me, the takeaway is i3.
It looks like an improvement over twm, fvwm and stumpwm
(which I have used) and others that I tried and rejected for
various reasons. (I was never attracted to the top-heavy
DEs).
The screencast[1] explains the rationale for the design
decisions, and development is active.
1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnYN2CTb1hM
--
Joel Roth
Reply to: