Subject: New options for FvwmIconMan

From: Brad Giaccio <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 07:11:38 -0500

I'd like some opinions here.  I added, as was requested quite a few
times, an option to FvwmIconMan to control the style for Iconified
windows.  Now as Chris pointed out it can be quite confusing if you
also have icons else where on your desktop and select those, because
the IconMan will mark the window with the focus style instead of the
iconstyle.  His suggestion is to add two more options "iconfocusbutton"
and "iconselectfocusbutton".  And now that I think about I guess we will
need iconselectbutton as well.

I'm afraid that would begin to get a bit unwieldy for users to
configure.  Giving you 8 different button styles to set.  I could
default iconfocus to focus until it is explicitlly set and do the same
for iconselectfocus and iconselect.

Any thoughts here, comments?

Brad
-- 
--- There are two kinds of knowledge, you either know the answer or
			you know where to find it
		      -Kane, Johnson, and anonymous
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked]

---

From: Tim Phipps <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 13:10:13 +0000

> for iconselectfocus and iconselect.

8 sounds like too many. Personally I would reduce it to four: plain,
iconified, focussed and selected in order of increasing priority

if (button is selected)
  use select
else if (window is focused)
  use focus
else if (window is iconified)
  use icon
else
  use plain

It seems like a lot less pain than trying to come up with an orthogonal
set, besides that using a priority style would let us put in a style for
shaded windows with only one extra test rather than go to 16 options.

Cheers,
Tim.

---

From: Brad Giaccio <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 08:24:30 -0500

> iconified, focussed and selected in order of increasing priority

which is how it stands now with the addition of focusandselected and I
would feel is sufficient, so Chris so far that is two votes in favor of
no more options and one vote in favor of more.

---

From: Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 16:31:29 +0100

> would feel is sufficient, so Chris so far that is two votes in favor of
                                                    ^^^

Three.

Let's rather keep it simple (or is anybody able to control all the
'dirty'-flags in icon man?).  If we make it even more complex we
won't be able to maintain icon man soon.

> no more options and one vote in favor of more.

Bye

Dominik ^_^

-- 
Dominik Vogt, Agilent Technologies, Dept. BVS
Herrenberger Str.130, 71034 Boeblingen, Germany
phone: 07031/464-4596, fax: 07031/464-3883, [email-masked]
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked]

---

From: Brad Giaccio <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 10:37:42 -0500

> won't be able to maintain icon man soon.

I don't know about you but I'm finding it dificult to follow even now,
and I just went through the pane of understanding the dirty flags.

Brad

---

From: Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 18:01:46 +0100

> and I just went through the pane of understanding the dirty flags.

Well, I think it took me a day or so to write my last icon man
patch.  It's terribly hard to understand.

Bye

Dominik ^_^