On Sun 30 Oct 2011 08:53:48 AM PDT, Martin Kopta wrote:
> 4) Should be the code made smaller by witty constructions or do you
> prefer boring and obvious constructions (which are generaly longer)?
Following this train of thought, what does the suckless community have
to say about sanity checks vi
> I just want to be fair to the small crowd of remaining wmii users to
> have a smooth relocation. Everything will be accomplished until mid of
> December.
Thanks. Not many of us depend on the web site anyway, but new users
should have the freedom to find it.
On 4 November 2011 12:24, hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Anselm is scared to piss of the "community" so he needs everyone to
> agree with his rules and ideas beforehand. Typical social behaviorism
> I guess.
I just want to be fair to the small crowd of remaining wmii users to
have a smooth
On 4 November 2011 11:50, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 4 November 2011 09:40, markus schnalke wrote:
>> Someone already pointed it out. It actually were suckless projects
>> that did intentionally not care about the meaning of version numbers.
>
> I agree. I don't even see why we don't just drop
On 4 November 2011 10:40, markus schnalke wrote:
> [2011-10-31 10:11] Anselm R Garbe
>> On 31 October 2011 10:01, Martin Kopta wrote:
>> > Are there any explicit rules which project must follow in order to be part
>> > of suckless? What is the line in here?
>>
>> I'm working on such guidelines.
Anselm is scared to piss of the "community" so he needs everyone to
agree with his rules and ideas beforehand. Typical social behaviorism
I guess.
+--- markus schnalke ---+
> I wonder why we actually do need such guidelines. We don't have masses
> of projects to filter. We can simply continue including what we (i.e.
> eventually Anselm) consider worthwhile and remove what we consider not
> suiti
On 4 November 2011 09:40, markus schnalke wrote:
> Someone already pointed it out. It actually were suckless projects
> that did intentionally not care about the meaning of version numbers.
I agree. I don't even see why we don't just drop the first dot and
have dwm-60, dmenu-45.
> And about qual
[2011-10-31 10:11] Anselm R Garbe
> On 31 October 2011 10:01, Martin Kopta wrote:
> > Are there any explicit rules which project must follow in order to be part
> > of suckless? What is the line in here?
>
> I'm working on such guidelines. The main aspects are:
I wonder why we actually do need
On 11/3/11, Andrew Hills wrote:
> Nothing you do to a web standard will ever keep a designer from using an
> image to display text content except disallowing the transfer of images.
>
However poetic your statement, disabling embedding of images will
suffice. was probably the first great anti-feat
Nothing you do to a web standard will ever keep a designer from using an
image to display text content except disallowing the transfer of images.
--Andrew Hills
On 03.11.2011 09:42, Hadrian Węgrzynowski wrote:
We would need something more like Markdown web or gopher... We want
content! Presentation could be only client's issue.
If somebody likes Apple look then every site could look like one.
If one likes plain text look then every site could look like
On Thu, 3 Nov 2011 18:14:12 +1100
Alex Hutton wrote:
>It has occured to me that web-servers should be sending the content in
>json format, with the first page load on the site loading a html page
>with the json handler in the head. Then if you didn't like the UI
>provided by the site you could re
It has occured to me that web-servers should be sending the content in
json format, with the first page load on the site loading a html page
with the json handler in the head. Then if you didn't like the UI
provided by the site you could replace it with your own by using your
own JS and handling th
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote:
> Or the user agent (aka your browser). Furthermore, this will allow you to
> customize layout by configuring your user agent. Read: layouts that suck
> less. HTML tables are completely uncustomizable.
No it won't, because people will cont
On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 17:05:17 -, wrote:
Print versions, where they exist, are the sanest solution in my
experience. Wikipedia is a nice example. I have a bookmark, which sends
me directly there. Not perfect though, because links point to
non-printable versions of the article. Shame.
In that
On Wed, 02 Nov 2011 15:14:39 -, Andreas Krennmair
wrote:
On the contrary, HTML5 goes the way of bringing markup to a more
abstract, semantic way (with a plethora of new tags such as ,
and many more), and for this semantic markup the layout is
defined purely via CSS.
Or the user agen
Somebody claiming to be Kurt H Maier wrote:
web idiots have been spouting such bullshit since the 'graceful
degradation' days of html4. it's never come true, and it never will,
because the "standards" put forth are anything but. what you are
talking about is the web version of "the check is in
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 1:14 PM, wrote:
> developing sane web applications is possible for ages. If you put "from
> lynx to full-blown browsers" into the definition of sane (which is
> itself the only sane way) everithing is clear. Most folks don't seem to
> think like that and trade usability and
* Andreas Krennmair [2011-11-02 16:59]:
> * Kurt H Maier [2011-11-02 16:40]:
> And progressive enhancement has already become true. Much
> of the whole HTML5 hype is BS, but it has been shown that it isn't
> too difficult to develop web applications that are functional on a
> vast range of client
* Bjartur Thorlacius [2011-11-02 15:55]:
> I used to use mobile version of some websites, but as handheld
> computer bloat up, so do websites.
Sadly yes. Another problem there is that they try to be smarter than the
client by offering some buttons to hide and show content, rather than
just showi
* hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> [2011-11-02 13:21]:
> No. I try to use hget+sed+htmlfmt for Offline reading and synchronising,
> [..]
> Searching for solutions...
best compromise I found was w3m which has a decent way to spawn external
"browsers", which I misuse for flash or other evil stuff which
* Kurt H Maier [2011-11-02 16:40]:
web idiots have been spouting such bullshit since the 'graceful
degradation' days of html4. it's never come true, and it never will,
because the "standards" put forth are anything but. what you are
talking about is the web version of "the check is in the mail
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Andreas Krennmair wrote:
> Another core concept that plays into this is "progressive enhancement",
> which states that the basic content can be downloaded and displayed in a
> simple yet readable manner by only presenting the content itself (w/o
> images, CSS, or J
* Bjartur Thorlacius [2011-11-02 16:00]:
* hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> [2011-11-02 10:11]:
> > I once envisioned a Plugin to directly go to "Print Views" of
> > websites,
> > since they tend to have considerably less suck on them.
>
I used to use mobile version of some websites, but as handhel
> * hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> [2011-11-02 10:11]:
> > > I once envisioned a Plugin to directly go to "Print Views" of
> > > websites,
> > > since they tend to have considerably less suck on them.
> >
I used to use mobile version of some websites, but as handheld
computer bloat up, so do websites
No. I try to use hget+sed+htmlfmt for Offline reading and synchronising,
but like you said images are no fun in text only formats. So ive also
played around with cleaned html in rss and mails, but stuff just doesnt
feel right.
Searching for solutions...
Am 02.11.2011 10:45 schrieb :
> * hiro <23h.
* hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> [2011-11-02 10:11]:
> > I once envisioned a Plugin to directly go to "Print Views" of websites,
> > since they tend to have considerably less suck on them.
>
> I used to do the same thing, also I processed these pages with a few
> scripts and htmlfmt.
Do you mean, y
cting an other CSS layout. So we are pretty
much left alone with a huge pile of junk in every html file today.
Also -- HTML embedded base64 encoded images every two or three lines
(for the 30 twitter symbols).
Fuck HTML5
> I once envisioned a Plugin to directly go to "Print Views" of websites,
> since they tend to have considerably less suck on them.
I used to do the same thing, also I processed these pages with a few
scripts and htmlfmt. But then these clever web site operators stopped
serving specially cleansed
Anselm R Garbe writes:
> On 31 October 2011 12:42, Troels Henriksen wrote:
>> Anselm R Garbe writes:
>>
>>> * surf (seems dead, please shout if you disagree or if anyone wants to
>>> take this on, it doesn't make sense if it is not maintained, as
>>> webkitgtk carries away)
>>
>> I wouldn't min
On 31 October 2011 12:42, Troels Henriksen wrote:
> Anselm R Garbe writes:
>
>> * surf (seems dead, please shout if you disagree or if anyone wants to
>> take this on, it doesn't make sense if it is not maintained, as
>> webkitgtk carries away)
>
> I wouldn't mind taking maintainership of Surf, i
Hi,
Am 31.10.2011 um 20:44 schrieb Anselm R Garbe :
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 08:39:00PM +0100, Joerg Zinke wrote:
>>
>>
> * surf (seems dead, please shout if you disagree or if anyone wants to
> take this on, it doesn't make sense if it is not maintained, as
> webkitgtk carries awa
On 11-01 10:11, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
A problem, though, is that it removes hyperlinks.
I consider this a problem as well.
If there was an option to keep links, I'd happily enable it. Also I'd
adjust the new CSS (as in: clear it.
I wonder if it would be possible to 'crowdsource' readabil
On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 06:20:29PM +0100, pancake wrote:
> >> On 31 October 2011 23:28, Nick wrote:
> >>> http://njw.me.uk/software/simplyread/ is a little js thing I wrote
> >>> which is basically a nicer, simpler version of readability. works
> >>> with surf, uzbl, chrome, firefox.
>
> Can you p
Can you port it to surf and add it to the surf extensions page?
On 01/11/2011, at 10:44, Nick wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 09:34:21AM +, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
>> On 31 October 2011 23:28, Nick wrote:
>>> http://njw.me.uk/software/simplyread/ is a little js thing I wrote
>>> which is
I don't like simplyread at all, but drunk as I was I've been playing
around with this http://labs.opera.com/news/2011/10/19/
here's the user stylesheet I'm currently using with it. Great if you
have a large display and don't want to scroll down after every clicked
link.
I also activate the Black
> I wonder if it would be possible to 'crowdsource' readability so we
> can contribute bits of pages to hide, like on Wikipedia we don't care
> about '[edit]', etc... Not sure how we'd go about that, though.
I'd rather pull out all the contents and indexes out of the most
worthy web sites we navig
On 1 November 2011 09:34, anonymous wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 10:21:19PM +0100, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
>> ... because it clashes with the developers' CSS. That's the problem. I
>> think there ought to be pure style-free semantic HTML, and then users
>> can style every site to fit their pe
On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 10:11:46AM +, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 1 November 2011 09:44, Nick wrote:
> > - test the current xpi with firefox, using mozilla's addon
> > compatibility extension, to see if it works, or
>
> Done. It seems to work fine.
Cool, thanks, I'll release an updated xp
On 1 November 2011 09:44, Nick wrote:
> As for your futuristic firefox, if you could be so kind,
> could you either:
> - test the current xpi with firefox, using mozilla's addon
> compatibility extension, to see if it works, or
Done. It seems to work fine. A problem, though, is that it removes
h
On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 09:34:21AM +, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 31 October 2011 23:28, Nick wrote:
> > http://njw.me.uk/software/simplyread/ is a little js thing I wrote
> > which is basically a nicer, simpler version of readability. works
> > with surf, uzbl, chrome, firefox.
>
> Thanks!
On 31 October 2011 23:28, Nick wrote:
> http://njw.me.uk/software/simplyread/ is a little js thing I wrote
> which is basically a nicer, simpler version of readability. works
> with surf, uzbl, chrome, firefox.
Thanks! However, your XPI is incompatible with my Firefox (9.0a2) and
the source tarba
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 10:21:19PM +0100, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> ... because it clashes with the developers' CSS. That's the problem. I
> think there ought to be pure style-free semantic HTML, and then users
> can style every site to fit their personal needs, without it resulting
> in ugly.
ht
On 10-31 23:28, Nick wrote:
http://njw.me.uk/software/simplyread/ is a little js thing I wrote
which is basically a nicer, simpler version of readability. works
with surf, uzbl, chrome, firefox.
Awesome! I've had this idea for years, but never found anyone following
through with it.
--
ilf
2011/11/1 Nick :
> Quoth Peter John Hartman:
...
> Task maybe-one-maybe-two: make it play nice with webkit-gtk compiled
> against gtk3. Gtk3 probably sucks less than 2, but regardless, it's
> the future of webkit-gtk. Further into the future, hopefully an EFL
> based webkit port will happen, which
Quoth Connor Lane Smith:
> ... because it clashes with the developers' CSS. That's the problem. I
> think there ought to be pure style-free semantic HTML, and then users
> can style every site to fit their personal needs, without it resulting
> in ugly. Unfortunately people take the opportunity to
Quoth Peter John Hartman:
> Task One: Make it play nice with webkit-gtk 1.6.1 (which it doesn't; 1.4.2
> is as high as you can get.)
Task maybe-one-maybe-two: make it play nice with webkit-gtk compiled
against gtk3. Gtk3 probably sucks less than 2, but regardless, it's
the future of webkit-gtk.
Adapting the makefile to link against gtk3 shouldnt be dramatic. At some point
gtk2 will be like gtk1. And having two versions of the same lib sucks.
Im not using surf actually, but i find it nice to keep it in suckless. X11 is a
huge dep for dwm and this is not a reason to kill it :P
On 31/10/
On 31 October 2011 16:41, Jonathan Slark wrote:
> Thinking about it what I don't like about CSS is that the majority of the
> web has a white background. Yes, you can try and use custom CSS but then
> most of the web then looks ugly.
... because it clashes with the developers' CSS. That's the pr
On 31 October 2011 21:35, Nico Golde wrote:
> While this looks way more simple and sane I want to keep the behaviour for the
> -h command line switch as it's kinda expected to work with most programs.
If you don't check for '-h' it will still enter the switch and hit
default, resulting in usage()
On 31/10/2011 15:25, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
Roff is actually one of the ugliest markup languages I have ever seen.
HTML is actually pretty decent if you think about it. It's
(more-or-less) XML, which isn't nice, but I'd take that over roff any
day. Anyway, the main problem with the web is the o
Hi,
* Connor Lane Smith [2011-10-31 21:05]:
> On 31 October 2011 20:33, Nico Golde wrote:
> > Sorry for the late response, missed this thread. I'm still maintaining and
> > using it. So do some other people who occasionally contact me.
>
> Could you please apply the attached sanity patch? There
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 4:21 PM, Anthony Martin wrote:
> This is just a side effect of having to
> deal with X11 on Unix and not something
> intrinsically difficult about 9P.
imo it's specifically about libixp: if the OS provides 9p interfaces
to use, that's one thing, but having to build them y
Anselm R Garbe once said:
> It is also noteworthy to remember that I actually
> started dwm development *mainly* because I came
> to the conclusion that libixp or 9P in general
> makes it extraordinary more complex to write a
> simple tool like a window manager for no really
> good reason.
This i
On 31 October 2011 20:33, Nico Golde wrote:
> Sorry for the late response, missed this thread. I'm still maintaining and
> using it. So do some other people who occasionally contact me.
Could you please apply the attached sanity patch? There are a few
strange bits in the source.
Thanks,
cls
diff
Am 31.10.2011 um 20:34 schrieb Peter John Hartman :
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 12:45:02PM -0600, Jeremy Jackins wrote:
>>> The current list of unclear removal candidates is:
>>>
>>> * surf (seems dead, please shout if you disagree or if anyone wants to
>>> take this on, it doesn't make sense if i
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 08:39:00PM +0100, Joerg Zinke wrote:
>
> Am 31.10.2011 um 14:35 schrieb Peter John Hartman
> :
>
> >>> * surf (seems dead, please shout if you disagree or if anyone wants to
> >>> take this on, it doesn't make sense if it is not maintained, as
> >>> webkitgtk carries away
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 08:33:05PM +0100, Nico Golde wrote:
> * Anselm R Garbe [2011-10-31 11:02]:
> > On 31 October 2011 10:43, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> > > On 31 October 2011 08:38, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
> > >> The current list of unclear removal candidates is:
> > >>
> > >> * ii (Nion, are
Am 31.10.2011 um 14:35 schrieb Peter John Hartman :
>>> * surf (seems dead, please shout if you disagree or if anyone wants to
>>> take this on, it doesn't make sense if it is not maintained, as
>>> webkitgtk carries away)
Shout!
>> I wouldn't mind taking maintainership of Surf, if necessary.
Hi,
* Anselm R Garbe [2011-10-31 11:02]:
> On 31 October 2011 10:43, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> > On 31 October 2011 08:38, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
> >> The current list of unclear removal candidates is:
> >>
> >> * ii (Nion, are you still maintaining it?)
> >
> > I disagree with this on the basis
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 12:45:02PM -0600, Jeremy Jackins wrote:
> > The current list of unclear removal candidates is:
> >
> > * surf (seems dead, please shout if you disagree or if anyone wants to
> > take this on, it doesn't make sense if it is not maintained, as
> > webkitgtk carries away)
> > *
> The current list of unclear removal candidates is:
>
> * surf (seems dead, please shout if you disagree or if anyone wants to
> take this on, it doesn't make sense if it is not maintained, as
> webkitgtk carries away)
> * ii (Nion, are you still maintaining it?)
I'm fine with the other ones, but
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 15:25:48 +
Connor Lane Smith wrote:
>
> Roff is actually one of the ugliest markup languages I have ever seen.
> HTML is actually pretty decent if you think about it. It's
> (more-or-less) XML, which isn't nice, but I'd take that over roff any
> day. Anyway, the main probl
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 12:32 PM, Bjartur Thorlacius
wrote:
> If someone wants to write ugly code we can't stop him. But what's
> wrong with supporting handwritten HTML documentation?
> I'm not proposing using autogenerated HTML recursively populated with
> divs by JavaScript. The only argument in
With regards to ii,
> The problem imho is usability. Maybe some shellscripts or rcscripts can help
> here..
>
> Iirc there was a program that was reading one line at the bottom and writing
> to a pipe and getting the output of another pipe into the other part of the
> screen. Like irssi/bx does
On 10/31/11, Christoph Lohmann <2...@r-36.net> wrote:
> »And as long as the markup is terse« is a never fulfilled requirement.
> But surely, extending roff with runtime shellscripts will extend its
> usefulness. It's like Qt vs. plain C – redundancy vs. lean code.
>
If someone wants to write ugly c
Greetings.
On 31.10.2011 15:57, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 09:34:10 -, Christoph Lohmann <2...@r-36.net> wrote:
>> Martin Kopta wrote:
>>> Proposal: 6. It has useful documentation.
>>
>> Now bureaucracy begins. What documentation? A manpage should suffice,
>> when it reach
On 31 October 2011 14:57, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote:
> There's nothing wrong with HTML documentation per se, and it sure is not
> worse than ASCII. Why do you believe roff is better than HTML? Just pipe the
> markup through htmlfmt(1) or html2text(1) if you like reading documentation
> on terminal
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Bjartur Thorlacius
wrote:
> There's nothing wrong with HTML documentation per se, and it sure is not
> worse than ASCII. Why do you believe roff is better than HTML? Just pipe the
> markup through htmlfmt(1) or html2text(1) if you like reading documentation
> on t
Markdown is the only decent option for documentation. A part from a .docx
On 31/10/2011, at 15:57, "Bjartur Thorlacius" wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 09:34:10 -, Christoph Lohmann <2...@r-36.net> wrote:
>> Martin Kopta wrote:
>>> Proposal: 6. It has useful documentation.
>>
>> Now bureaucrac
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 09:34:10 -, Christoph Lohmann <2...@r-36.net> wrote:
Martin Kopta wrote:
Proposal: 6. It has useful documentation.
Now bureaucracy begins. What documentation? A manpage should suffice,
when it reaches 1.0. I think it's already sucking, if a project really
needs a webbro
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 08:44:01AM -0500, Stanley Lieber wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 8:41 AM, Jonathan Slark
> wrote:
> > On 31/10/2011 13:33, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> >>
> >> No, it then becomes a pain in the ass for experts, because you get
> >> hundreds of illiterate assholes storming mailing
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 8:41 AM, Jonathan Slark
wrote:
> On 31/10/2011 13:33, Kurt H Maier wrote:
>>
>> No, it then becomes a pain in the ass for experts, because you get
>> hundreds of illiterate assholes storming mailing lists and irc
>> channels
>
>
>
> We have literate assholes on the lists i
On 31/10/2011 13:33, Kurt H Maier wrote:
No, it then becomes a pain in the ass for experts, because you get
hundreds of illiterate assholes storming mailing lists and irc
channels
We have literate assholes on the lists instead...
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 12:42:19PM +0100, Troels Henriksen wrote:
> Anselm R Garbe writes:
>
> > * surf (seems dead, please shout if you disagree or if anyone wants to
> > take this on, it doesn't make sense if it is not maintained, as
> > webkitgtk carries away)
>
> I wouldn't mind taking maint
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 7:45 AM, wrote:
> Putting elitism and relevance in the same line just doesn't make sense
> -- consider following: by chance, hundreds thousands of non-expert users
> discover the beauty of dwm through some end-user-friendly distro and
> overnight it's not only used by expe
The problem imho is usability. Maybe some shellscripts or rcscripts can help
here..
Iirc there was a program that was reading one line at the bottom and writing to
a pipe and getting the output of another pipe into the other part of the
screen. Like irssi/bx does but non monolitic and logging i
Connor Lane Smith writes:
> On 31 October 2011 12:27, Krnk Ktz wrote:
>> What should be done about ii? Are there features requests? I mean, it is a
>> great concept and works very well as it is, doesn't it?
>
> It works well, but the source could do with a little cleaning up.
> There are some we
On 31 October 2011 12:27, Krnk Ktz wrote:
> What should be done about ii? Are there features requests? I mean, it is a
> great concept and works very well as it is, doesn't it?
It works well, but the source could do with a little cleaning up.
There are some weird things, like fprintf(stderr, "%s"
>> For ii it is just a question of maintenance.
What should be done about ii? Are there features requests? I mean, it is a
great concept and works very well as it is, doesn't it?
* Anselm R Garbe [2011-10-31 12:51]:
> On 31 October 2011 12:45, wrote:
> > -- consider following: by chance, hundreds thousands of non-expert users
>
> This scenario is very unlikely,
I agree, not the best example. My remark was not of great practical
relevance, I know.
That aside, many th
On 31 October 2011 12:45, wrote:
> * Anselm R Garbe [2011-10-31 10:12]:
>> I'm working on such guidelines. The main aspects are:
>>
>>
>> 1. Relevance/Elitism: the project must be relevant in the context of
>> suckless.org's target audience, it must target expert
>> users/developers/administrato
* Anselm R Garbe [2011-10-31 10:12]:
> I'm working on such guidelines. The main aspects are:
>
>
> 1. Relevance/Elitism: the project must be relevant in the context of
> suckless.org's target audience, it must target expert
> users/developers/administrators and _not_ typical end users.
Putting
On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 10:11:28 +0100
Anselm R Garbe wrote:
> 3. Quality: the project must aim to be a quality finished product once
> exceeding the 1.0 version number and be maintained afterwards.
> Unmaintained projects will be removed after a grace period of one
> year.
those kind of version num
Anselm R Garbe writes:
> * surf (seems dead, please shout if you disagree or if anyone wants to
> take this on, it doesn't make sense if it is not maintained, as
> webkitgtk carries away)
I wouldn't mind taking maintainership of Surf, if necessary. I'm
already maintaining an off-tree fork with
On 31 October 2011 12:14, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 31 October 2011 10:59, Aurélien Aptel wrote:
>> I also think libixp and ii should stay. I don't use them personally
>> but I think they follow the suckless philosophy.
>
> ii does, but since 2007 the originally suckless libixp has been
> blo
On 31 October 2011 10:59, Aurélien Aptel wrote:
> I also think libixp and ii should stay. I don't use them personally
> but I think they follow the suckless philosophy.
ii does, but since 2007 the originally suckless libixp has been
bloated up alongside wmii. The repository includes *broken*
auto
I agree with libixp and ii staying.
mkopta
On 10/31/2011 11:59 AM, Aurélien Aptel wrote:
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 9:38 AM, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
* skvm (who uses this? development seems dead)
I use it. I installed it 1 or 2 years ago, never bothered to update it
since it works.
I also think
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 9:38 AM, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
> * skvm (who uses this? development seems dead)
I use it. I installed it 1 or 2 years ago, never bothered to update it
since it works.
I also think libixp and ii should stay. I don't use them personally
but I think they follow the suckless p
On 2011-10-31 10:49, pancake wrote:
> I dont understand the point of documentation.
Neither do I, so let's triage:
Deviation from Convention
served by README
Commentary on the Code
served by IRC, mailing list
What is this? How do I?
bless some wiki/forum someplace as *th
On 31 October 2011 10:00, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
> The current approach of having a README and a manpage is enough. If
> someone needs additional info, there is the wiki.
Oh, I'm not suggesting we package extra documentation *with* dwm, only
that we improve the documentation on the wiki. It really
On 31 October 2011 10:43, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 31 October 2011 08:38, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
>> The current list of unclear removal candidates is:
>>
>> * ii (Nion, are you still maintaining it?)
>
> I disagree with this on the basis that it's an interesting program. If
> need be I can ma
I dont understand the point of documentation.
If config/compile/install/uninstall must be documented we have a problem.
The target users we expect should be smart enought to read the source in case
of doubt. But comments in config.h should be clear enought to not allow users
to fall in c.
On 3
On 31 October 2011 08:38, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
> The current list of unclear removal candidates is:
>
> * ii (Nion, are you still maintaining it?)
I disagree with this on the basis that it's an interesting program. If
need be I can maintain it.
On 31 October 2011 09:34, Christoph Lohmann <2...@
README and manpage should be enough. The README should answer "What it
is", "What it is good for", "How to
compile/install/uninstall/configure/..", "Who is responsible" and
manpage should answer "How to use it". But I am probably all wrong.
mkopta
On 10/31/2011 10:34 AM, Christoph Lohmann wro
Greetings.
Martin Kopta wrote:
> Proposal: 6. It has useful documentation.
Now bureaucracy begins. What documentation? A manpage should suffice,
when it reaches 1.0. I think it's already sucking, if a project really
needs a webbrowser to be opened for the documentation.
Sincerely,
Christoph Lo
On 31 October 2011 10:19, hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> proper language. We only accept C and Go at the moment.
>
> So rc is not good enough?
It is, but an exception for a suckless.org project I think. I don't
expect many rc only based projects.
>> Unmaintained projects will be removed a
> proper language. We only accept C and Go at the moment.
So rc is not good enough?
> Unmaintained projects will be removed after a grace period of one year.
What if it doesn't need to be maintained?
> 5. Exclusivity: the project must be unique, i.e. it should not solve a
problem that is solv
Proposal: 6. It has useful documentation.
On 10/31/2011 10:11 AM, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
On 31 October 2011 10:01, Martin Kopta wrote:
Are there any explicit rules which project must follow in order to be part
of suckless? What is the line in here?
I'm working on such guidelines. The main asp
1 - 100 of 128 matches
Mail list logo
