On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 4:36 AM, David Tweed wrote:
> My view is that the plan 9 technologies are attractive if and only if
> they're used everywhere: if a pseudo-filesystem interface was
> pervasive it would avoid the "learn another new language/technology
> tricks/etc for this task" and the prob
On 11 Nov 2011 04:30, "Anselm R Garbe" wrote:
>
> On 8 November 2011 07:28, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
>
> > And how is "modern" wmii different from its, let's say, "pre-modern"
> > phase? From my view, it still uses the Plan9 protocol and the Plan9
> > approach of exposing a virtual filesystem fo
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 08/11/2011, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
>> I thought Suckless folks were enthusiastic about Plan9 technologies;
>> has this changed? If so, why?
>
> Appreciative, not necessarily enthusiastic. Plan 9 technologies have
> their place, but
On 8 November 2011 07:28, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
> On Thu 03 Nov 2011 09:57:19 AM PDT, Kurt H Maier wrote:
>> There is nothing "suckless" about any aspect of modern wmii
>
> I thought Suckless folks were enthusiastic about Plan9 technologies;
> has this changed? If so, why?
The overall concept
Hey,
On 08/11/2011, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
> I thought Suckless folks were enthusiastic about Plan9 technologies;
> has this changed? If so, why?
Appreciative, not necessarily enthusiastic. Plan 9 technologies have
their place, but it's very tempting to use them everywhere. I don't
believe 9P
On Mon, 7 Nov 2011 22:28:59 -0800
"Suraj N. Kurapati" wrote:
>On Thu 03 Nov 2011 09:57:19 AM PDT, Kurt H Maier wrote:
>> There is nothing "suckless" about any aspect of modern wmii
>
>I thought Suckless folks were enthusiastic about Plan9 technologies;
>has this changed? If so, why?
>
>And how i
On Thu 03 Nov 2011 09:57:19 AM PDT, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> There is nothing "suckless" about any aspect of modern wmii
I thought Suckless folks were enthusiastic about Plan9 technologies;
has this changed? If so, why?
And how is "modern" wmii different from its, let's say, "pre-modern"
phase? Fr
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 9:57 PM, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Jeffrey 'jf' Lim
> wrote:
> > hm. I see. So your argument was to disown wmii, because this *specific*
> > configuration - and NOT wmii itself - requires ruby. Alright.
>
> No, I want to disown wmii because it's
On 3 November 2011 02:23, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> Any word on a timetable for disowning wmii? This is a four-hundred
> line configuration that requires a 1600-line library, not to mention
> an entire extra programming language.
>
> To manage x11 windows.
I'm in the process arranging and performing
I think you misunderstand. While he may wish that no user again uses wmii,
that is not what he has stated here. His stated wish is wmii's removal from
suckless.org because it does not meet suckless standards.
--Andrew Hills
Yeah, and C engendered Java.
Just use your own "configuration" if you don't like it. And an older
version of wmii if you don't like change.
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Jeffrey 'jf' Lim wrote:
> hm. I see. So your argument was to disown wmii, because this *specific*
> configuration - and NOT wmii itself - requires ruby. Alright.
No, I want to disown wmii because it's a bloated >30ksloc monstrosity
that engenders other lesser monst
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 9:37 PM, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Jeffrey 'jf' Lim
> wrote:
> > what does that even mean? wmii *requires* ruby? Never heard of that.
>
> This configuration requires ruby. Try to keep up.
>
>
hm. I see. So your argument was to disown wmii, beca
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Jeffrey 'jf' Lim wrote:
> what does that even mean? wmii *requires* ruby? Never heard of that.
This configuration requires ruby. Try to keep up.
--
# Kurt H Maier
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> Anselm,
>
> Any word on a timetable for disowning wmii? This is a four-hundred
> line configuration that requires a 1600-line library, not to mention
> an entire extra programming language.
>
> To manage x11 windows.
>
>
what does that even m
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 7:49 PM, Suraj N. Kurapati wrote:
> Hello,
>
> For those who were weary of my Ruby wmiirc[1]'s power consumption,
> I am happy to announce that the latest Ruby 1.9.3-p0 stable release
> has solved Ruby's problem of causing excessive CPU wakeups-from-idle
Indeed it has. I ha
Anselm,
Any word on a timetable for disowning wmii? This is a four-hundred
line configuration that requires a 1600-line library, not to mention
an entire extra programming language.
To manage x11 windows.
--
# Kurt H Maier
Hello,
For those who were weary of my Ruby wmiirc[1]'s power consumption,
I am happy to announce that the latest Ruby 1.9.3-p0 stable release
has solved Ruby's problem of causing excessive CPU wakeups-from-idle
which would drain your laptop battery much sooner than you'd expect.
On my ASUS UL30A-
18 matches
Mail list logo
