Quoting message written on Monday 2014-06-09 11:13:14 by Carlos R. Mafra:
> If some behavior changed that was not intentional and
> we must fix it.
I agree but sometimes I am not sure if something has been
changed intentionally to increase consistency.
For example, recently (last week) Windowmaker has returned
some of it's previous behavior regarding cycling shaded
windows. I am very happy because of that. :-)
However, when you cycle through windows (with switchpanel
disabled) and if you stop on the shaded window, the shaded
window will unshade.
This behavior is the same whether switchpanel is disabled
or not but in the 0.80.2 it wouldn't unshade, it would just
focus and rise.
So, what to do in the example such as this one? Is this
intentional behavior or not and which behavior looks more
logical? To unshade or not to unshade, it is a question now.
> It would be great if you could 'git bisect' the issue to
> a particular patch. That would speed up the fix greatly
> since there is even a confusion about the issue itself.
Ok. I'll need some time to read the git documentation as I
don't know how to use it.
> I guess you can have something like
>
> "*" = {NoAppIcon = YES;};
>
> in your WMWindowAttributes file to disable them entirely.
I know about that option but I chose not to use it. I like
to see the icon of the application I am launching for the
first time and then I simply either disable it for that
particular application or drag the app icon to wmdrawer.
> Perhaps we should have an 'expert' option in WPrefs doing this,
> because I've seen this subject come up many times already.
I have no opinion on the matter but I do agree that some kind
of warning should be set in the description of the option.
--
Josip Deanovic
--
To unsubscribe, send mail to [email protected].
