Re: Re: update: Re: [dwm] recent changes to dwm (since dwm-3.5)

>>> sender: "Anselm R. Garbe" date: "Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 10:44:14AM +0100" <<<EOQ
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 11:23:53AM +0200, Alexandru E. Ungur wrote:
> > >>> sender: "Anselm R. Garbe" date: "Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 03:24:12PM +0100" <<<EOQ
> > > > I have a question: if instead of pull requesting the layout.c file for new
> > > > layouts, each of us who created a layout pull request would create a
> > > > separate file, such as:
> > > >
> > > > layout_grid.c
> > > > layout_bstack.c
> > >
> > > Do what you like, but don't forget that those files must be
> > > included in Makefile somehow and the function signatures must be
> > > local in layout.c as well... so I consider this as don't do it
> > > that way ;)
> > Ok then, thanks for the advice :)
>
> There is also another reason - the wmii-2 way only supported the
> arrange-function being integrated that way. But in dwm we have
> things like incnmaster() or resizemaster() which manipulate the
> tile()-layout. Hence it would get very messy to handle such
> add-on functions with such a way like we had in wmii-2 - so it
> is much easier and simplier for pull request contributors to put
> everything into 1 single superfeature.pull request file.
Ah, I see what you mean. Sorry I didn't explain too well what I meant.
The suggestion was actually for the pull request creators to change the way
they create pull requests (they have to change it anyway at this point :D) so
that it is easier for the endusers to integrate multiple pull requestes. I
did not suggest modifying dwm in any way.

What I did for my pull request (well, before I asked) was create that extra
layout_grid.c and then pull requesting Makefile (adding one 'word') and dwm.h
(adding one line). All these are done from the pull request, no need for
any changes on dwm side.

Now, because the changes to dwm were so small, I can easily integrate
other pull requestes now ;-) and I figured if other contributors would do the
same (where applicable of course) then it would be easier for all of
us to integrate multiple pull requestes.

I'll release the pull request right away, and then it will be clear what I'm
talking about :-)

Cheers,
Alex
Received on Wed Feb 21 2007 - 15:59:42 UTC