[openbox] openbox 3 comments/questions

[Ava Arachne Jarvis]

[Mike - Thu, 16 Oct 2003 10:03:11 PM CDT]
> On Thursday, October 16, 2003 at 07:32PM, Marc Wilson wrote:
> >Depends on what you're using to do the editing.  Anything decent that knows
> >what an XML file is will make it easy to make sure the keys match.  It's
> >just a little time consuming to move from one to the other.  I moved a
> >large, complex openbox2 menu over to openbox3 in less than a hour, and most
> >of that was figuring out how to nest menus.
> 
> Yeah, vim syntax highlighting really helps. It's not all that bad...

Plus there's matchers for XML (and other formats) on vim.sf.net.... and
it's not too difficult to write a folding expression for XML.


> I thought about making one, but like Marc said, it's a one time change and 
> doesn't take too much time. I'm sure someone will make one eventually.

Being a Debian-ite, I usually prefer to let Debian's menu system take
care of menus (and configure any individual menu items using ~/.menu/).
And there already exists a Debian menu script for Openbox3, so... :)


> >>-I don't like that NextWindow now shows an icon of the window you're
> >>switching to and you then have to let go for it to switch focus. I much
> >>preferred the instant focus changing like with openbox2. I think this
> >>should be an option.
> >
> >Funny, it *is* a configurable option.  The documentation is your friend.
> 
> Hiding the dialog is an option, but that's it. I happen to agree with poing 
> on the last bit, I don't care much for the behavior of actions not 
> finishing until the keys are released (or whatever you want to say).
> 
> Takes a little getting used to.

I can see some people preferring to have windows always be active and
focused while cycling, but that tends to destroy the stacking order.  


-- 
| Nothing is more admirable than the fortitude with which millionaires
| tolerate the disadvantages of their wealth.
| 		-- Nero Wolfe