| Re: [Sawfish] Comparison of extensible window managers. |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/sawfish Archives
]
- To: sawfish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [Sawfish] Comparison of extensible window managers.
- From: Teika Kazura <teika@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 17:50:52 +0900 (JST)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=lavabit; d=lavabit.com; b=rWz0y82AzDNx+M5n2ixrAKX/szomg3G7WtP4vLfH1UJXJje8/Gvfu9JiQi4vt51QWrFh21j/nYp2Y0DoHnDyyZuzERlrS30ybJ3wY7uNveQJa6UvCLt6J6ZSeKCvM1jv1ogv3R23Nsjre5k3eTf9y5Hm+Sgc7S33jnVN/3OOZHI=; h=Date:Message-Id:To:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:References:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding;
Thanks, Chris.
On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 17:01:33 +0200, Christopher Roy Bratusek wrote:
>> Recently I've coined the word "extensible window managers". It
>> should've been invented long before, but unfortunately I may be the
>> first.
I forgot to write the definition; they are "extensible by scripting".
So even though fluxbox looks highly configurable and really popular,
it's out. (Didn't know it's far better than opnebox.)
By scripting, you can set any exceptional = special behavior, and
that's really cool, isn't it?
Dunno why I forgot apps-menu & edge-actions.
> - WMaker dockapp support?
Dock may be "too stacking", i.e. it may not make much sense to tiling
WMs, but I've added one.
> - Other things of interesset: Tiling, WindowRules, Desktop-Integration...
Hmm, I'll be a bit surprised if there's scriptable WMs without
window-rules, since it's a simple hook matter. But Sawfish can
do most of window-rules with GUI, and that's good.
OTOH Sawfish's per-window-keymap is a good thing, and may be lacking in
others, so it's counted in the table.
With best regards,
Teika (Teika kazura)
---
--
Sawfish ML