'Re: [DNG] What do you guys like about Desktop Environments?'

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       dng
Subject:    Re: [DNG] What do you guys like about Desktop Environments?
From:       Didier Kryn <kryn () in2p3 ! fr>
Date:       2023-12-25 17:48:13
Message-ID: e4a2af6b-e5fb-4216-bba0-e5f369bfe2bd () in2p3 ! fr
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]

[Attachment #4 (text/plain)]

Le 25/12/2023 à 04:52, Steve Litt a écrit :
> As far as launching apps, the way I do it is with dmenu from Suckless
> Tools. If you're a keyboard kinda person, dmenu is by far the fastest
> and most efficient way to launch apps.
Le 24/12/2023 à 21:27, Gianluca Zoni via Dng a écrit :
> over a decade ago I started using StumpWM. Desktop environments
> are a waste of time: you have to gesture to make yourself
> understood by the computer, when we can talk to it or give it the
> right commands by typing key combinations in a single "musical
> chord" on the keyboard. StumpWM is programmable and integrates
> seamlessly with Emacs, Mutt, Conkeror, ... especially because
> over the years I've built an entire system of scripts and
> programs that I call the "zigzag system".

     You both, what you achieved is the result of a lot of configuration 
and scripting work. Instead, any DE works almost fine out of the box and 
is configurable through a menu.

     I think the general answer to the original question is that heavily 
using menus is less efficient than heavily using command-line, but, on 
the other hand, a menu is self-documenting, therefore, more efficient 
for applications you rarely use. For example, a terminal emulator is the 
very interface for command-line, but do you like to spend days in 
customizing its apearance? No, this very task you do only once is more 
efficiently done through a menu.

     In Xterm, everything is configurable through one zilion 
command-line options, which, in practice would imply to RTFM and write 
one's own script to start it, because it does not read a config file. 
Konsole, Gnome-terminal or Xfce4-terminal, what more are they than 
front-ends to Xterm with config files and menu-driven configuration.

     For what regards Dmenu, in all DEs there is an application menu for 
all applications which are "integrated" in the Freedesktop sense, which 
just means they come with a .desktop file stored in 
/usr/share/applications/ . Do you, Steve, find it feasible to 
automatically read all the .desktop files in /usr/share/applications/ 
and build a Dmenu tree for all of them? Each .desktop file includes a 
"category" which drives the structure of the menu as a two-level tree. I 
think this kind of tool might boost the adoption of Dmenu.

--     Didier

[Attachment #5 (text/html)]

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">Le 25/12/2023 Ã  04:52, Steve Litt a
      Ã©crit  :<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
      cite="mid:20231224225250.5b81e486@mydesk.domain.cxm">
      <pre>As far as launching apps, the way I do it is with dmenu from Suckless
Tools. If you're a keyboard kinda person, dmenu is by far the fastest
and most efficient way to launch apps.</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">Le 24/12/2023 Ã  21:27, Gianluca Zoni
      via Dng a Ã©crit  :<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:ZYiUKMb5InEb5SNv@inventati.org">
      <pre>over a decade ago I started using StumpWM. Desktop environments
are a waste of time: you have to gesture to make yourself
understood by the computer, when we can talk to it or give it the
right commands by typing key combinations in a single "musical
chord" on the keyboard. StumpWM is programmable and integrates
seamlessly with Emacs, Mutt, Conkeror, ... especially because
over the years I've built an entire system of scripts and
programs that I call the "zigzag system".</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <p>       You both, what you achieved is the result of a lot of
      configuration and scripting work. Instead, any DE works almost
      fine out of the box and is configurable through a menu.</p>
    <p>       I think the general answer to the original question is that
      heavily using menus is less efficient than heavily using
      command-line, but, on the other hand, a menu is self-documenting,
      therefore, more efficient for applications you rarely use. For
      example, a terminal emulator is the very interface for
      command-line, but do you like to spend days in customizing its
      apearance? No, this very task you do only once is more efficiently
      done through a menu.<br>
    </p>
    <p>       In Xterm, everything is configurable through one zilion
      command-line options, which, in practice would imply to RTFM and
      write one's own script to start it, because it does not read a
      config file. Konsole, Gnome-terminal or Xfce4-terminal, what more
      are they than front-ends to Xterm with config files and
      menu-driven configuration.<br>
    </p>
           For what regards Dmenu, in all DEs there is an application menu
    for all applications which are "integrated" in the Freedesktop
    sense, which just means they come with a .desktop file stored in
    /usr/share/applications/ . Do you, Steve, find it feasible to
    automatically read all the .desktop files in
    /usr/share/applications/ and build a Dmenu tree for all of them?
    Each .desktop file includes a "category" which drives the structure
    of the menu as a two-level tree. I think this kind of tool might
    boost the adoption of Dmenu.
    <p>--        Didier<br>
    </p>
    <p></p>
  </body>
</html>

_______________________________________________
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 