Re: Would you agree - Debian is for the tech savvy
On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 07:09:04PM +0100, Axel Beckert wrote:
> Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> > Wouter Verhelst dijo [Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 06:45:49PM +0100]:
> > > [M-F-T set, as this is getting increasingly off-topic]
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 10:16:55AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> > > > I mean, who needs a desktop?
> You mean a bloaty, shiny desktop environment?
> > > > A background?
> Haven't seen mine in months. I think it's broken for a year or two now
> anyways. There's only a single tile shown despite it should be
> repeated. But I don't care as only see it very occassionally.
Translucent terminals FTW ;-)
> > > > Overlapping windows?
> Are you crazy? Nobody wants that! That's horribly inefficient! No nicely
> aligned windows either!
> > > > We the *real* tech-savvy people only need a tiling window
> > > > manager, such as
> > > > i3:
> > >
> > > Nah. Awesomewm is much better! ;-)
> Unfortunately no more. I still have awesome on hold on 3.4.15-1
> because 3.5.x is incompatible with the no more updated awesome-extra
> package. And without awesome-extra, awesome is far less awesome... :-(
Never used that. However, reading the description, I'm not very impressed:
* wicked, a widget manager which can fill them with various system information
(CPU or memory usage, network bandwidth, etc);
* shifty, an extension implementing dynamic tagging;
* obvious, a set of several widgets (WiFi link quality, battery usage, etc),
* vicious, a widget manager;
* revelation, expose like functionality;
* bashets, use your shell scripts as content providers for widgets;
* flaw, object oriented library providing a thin abstraction layer
above awesome widgets.
So, that's a widget manager, something else, a widget manager
superseding the first, a widget manager, something else, a widget bash
thingy, and something "providing a thin abstraction layer [for] widgets"
(which is what, another widget manager?)
Would you like a widget manager with your widget manager?
> So I wonder if I should switch to i3 which is properly maintained and
> seems to have all the features I need since 4.x...
Let me guess, it has widgets? ;-P
> > Lua for configuration is overrated. It's not for techies, it's for
> > masochists. A techie knows when to let go ;-)
> .... and has proper config files. Awesome 2.x was indeed awesome as it
> didn't have that annoying lua-drawback.
> Oh, and btw.:
So i3 is more popular. If I cared about that, I'd be using gnome or KDE,
not a tiling window manager.
> > (hell, should I have refrained from this last reply?)
> Nope. ;-)
Not on this list, at least :-)
< ron> I mean, the main *practical* problem with C++, is there's like a dozen
people in the world who think they really understand all of its rules,
and pretty much all of them are just lying to themselves too.
-- #debian-devel, OFTC, 2016-02-12