[9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Stuart Morrow]

https://kwlug.org/node/1319

Go to 12:10.

Apparently "Exit" is confusable with "Delete".

I wouldn't bother with the rest of the video.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Sigrid Solveig Haflínudóttir]

It's hard to bother with a video that doesn't even load.
Hope it works for someone else.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[unobe]

Quoth Sigrid Solveig Haflínudóttir <sigrid@ftrv.se>:
> It's hard to bother with a video that doesn't even load.
> Hope it works for someone else.

Worked for me--I used mothra to go to the linked page, then to the
archive.org link, and downloaded the mp4 file, and played with
treason.


I was also to watch the video on an apple device.

It just showed that during the presentation, the presenter mis-clicked
'Exit' and had to re-start his drawterm.  I recall there was some
discussion around this added menu item and if it should have a
confirmation akin to what is done with mothra's 'exit' menu item:
another click to confirm.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Stuart Morrow]

> It just showed that during the presentation, the presenter mis-clicked
> 'Exit' and had to re-start his drawterm.  I recall there was some
> discussion around this added menu item and if it should have a
> confirmation akin to what is done with mothra's 'exit' menu item:
> another click to confirm.

The discussion should have been should it be enabled at all.

I'm pretty against keyboard control in window management in
particular, triply so on Plan 9, but keybindings could actually be
tolerated if they were available only while the window management menu
is quasimodally held open with button 3. It's better than the nested
GNU Screen way of controlling where commands go.

And Exit is neither really "window management" anyway nor something
anyone is actually missing if it's undiscoverable without a man page
read.

And q to quit is a Plan 9 standard already.

Also, if checking for /env/wsys is too much magic (this was the real
reason Exit was enabled - not that anyone actually *uses* it in the
parent rio) you could check for service=cpu instead and get
practically the same result.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[qwx]

> The discussion should have been should it be enabled at all.
> 
> I'm pretty against keyboard control in window management in
> particular, triply so on Plan 9, but keybindings could actually be
> tolerated if they were available only while the window management menu
> is quasimodally held open with button 3. It's better than the nested
> GNU Screen way of controlling where commands go.
> 
> And Exit is neither really "window management" anyway nor something
> anyone is actually missing if it's undiscoverable without a man page
> read.
> 
> And q to quit is a Plan 9 standard already.
> 
> Also, if checking for /env/wsys is too much magic (this was the real
> reason Exit was enabled - not that anyone actually *uses* it in the
> parent rio) you could check for service=cpu instead and get
> practically the same result.

The current state was generally agreed upon after plenty of
discussion, which occurred before, during and after the patches
surrounding rio Exit, and which anyone could look up if they cared to.
I don't think anything prevents anyone from just reverting or
modifying them if they're unsatisfied with them.

If you want GNU screen on plan9, go for it.  You can implement it
without even touching rio by using /dev/kbdtap.  You can also combine
that with riow and bar scripts.  There's literally nothing preventing
you from reimplementing your favorite unix terminal multiplexer or GNU
tool on plan9.  Of course, you probably already know all of this,
which is why you're reviving this discussion after someone failed to
quit sam or operate rio for a moment.  I didn't know about q being
standard though, I tried typing q in acme, but it doesn't work, what
gives?

qwx

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Stuart Morrow]

On 10/08/2023, qwx@sciops.net <qwx@sciops.net> wrote:
> If you want GNU screen on plan9

Nice comprehension. Show me where I said this. Or are you being this
obtuse just so you can double down on this of all 9front changes?

The rest of your email is neither here nor there as it's about how you
could implement a Linux weenie window manager, which I have always
been against (on three basises), and 9front types themselves have
generally wanted.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Sigrid Solveig Haflínudóttir]

> The discussion should have been should it be enabled at all.

That's just, like, your opinion, man.
We have discussions on #cat-v and on grid.
Everybody is welcome to join in.
But no, better speculate elsewhere (reddit, discord, whatever)
then complain about artwork touching here, on the ML.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Stuart Morrow]

> We have discussions on #cat-v and on grid.

Or, in this case, on the list.

> But no, better speculate elsewhere (reddit, discord, whatever)
> then complain about artwork touching here, on the ML.

I'm "speculating" on the list, although I don't know why you'd say
speculating when all the following are just facts.

Exit sounds like it could mean to close, plus it's easier to find in
the menu than Delete is.

The button 3 menu always appears, and can only appear, in the rio that
has focus, so keyboard stuff that only works while that menu is up
will always go to the right rio. Is this not the biggest reason why
keyboard controls (desired by 9front types) have always been kept out
of rio?

Exit is something nobody wants unless they're advanced enough to know
about hidden menu commands.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Sigrid Solveig Haflínudóttir]

> > We have discussions on #cat-v and on grid.
> 
> Or, in this case, on the list.

Right, except Exit was discussed back and forth on both channels I
mentioned, while being developed and after, with many opinions
considered.  We arrived at where we are now based on the result of
those discussions.  It wasn't just one person secretly git/push'ing.

> > But no, better speculate elsewhere (reddit, discord, whatever)
> > then complain about artwork touching here, on the ML.
> 
> I'm "speculating" on the list, although I don't know why you'd say
> speculating when all the following are just facts.
> 
> Exit sounds like it could mean to close, plus it's easier to find in
> the menu than Delete is.

That is a speculation, not a fact.  Maybe for you personally this is
confusing? Quoting the author of the video you linked:

	< nzm_> hey, I just saw on ML someone mentioned my presentation
		- happy you found it but my error was oddly trivial and I'm not sure
		what the issue is

> Exit is something nobody wants unless they're advanced enough to know
> about hidden menu commands.

That is a speculation.  Several people wanted an Exit and it was
enough "wants" to get it in.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Sigrid Solveig Haflínudóttir]

Alternative idea - more constructive:

1) produce a patch with the desired behavior
2) send the patch to the ML

If developers do not consider it useful, maybe someone else will, and
would want to apply it locally, which is very trivial.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Stuart Morrow]

No can do.

On 10/08/2023, Sigrid Solveig Haflínudóttir <sigrid@ftrv.se> wrote:
> Alternative idea - more constructive:
>
> 1) produce a patch with the desired behavior
> 2) send the patch to the ML
>
> If developers do not consider it useful, maybe someone else will, and
> would want to apply it locally, which is very trivial.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Stuart Morrow]

> Right, except Exit was discussed back and forth on both channels I
> mentioned, while being developed and after, with many opinions
> considered.  We arrived at where we are now based on the result of
> those discussions.  It wasn't just one person secretly git/push'ing.

"There was discussion" and "the matter is settled" are clearly not the
same thing.

The first part of that inequation is disputed by nobody.  That Exit
and Delete are conflatable was not brought up at all back then to my
knowledge, so the current solution doesn't take the whole problem into
account.

I offer a concept that would solve a number of problems with a single
technology:

1. The question of how to Exit - and the fact that it was discussed
shows there is a question.

2. People would like to be able to alt-tab and stuff (in this concept
it would just be tab - you don't need alt when you're already in a
quasimode), but how do you do keyboard control when nesting exists. On
other systems nestable multiplexers use the logical but *plain bad*
method of escaping keyboard commands. This sets the standard for what
to avoid.

3. Keeping menus short.  Window management that requires a manual is
an absolute non-starter if you ask me, but if we're just talking
"extra" commands it's fine.

Not sure if this belongs to 2 or 3, but I wouldn't mind seeing what
happens and what usage patterns emerge when undo/redo (for win. mgmt
operations) exists. Thousands of window managers and nobody ever seems
to think of this?

>> Exit sounds like it could mean to close, plus it's easier to find in
>> the menu than Delete is.
>
> That is a speculation, not a fact.  Maybe for you personally this is
> confusing? Quoting the author of the video you linked:
>
> 	< nzm_> hey, I just saw on ML someone mentioned my presentation
> 		- happy you found it but my error was oddly trivial and I'm not sure
> 		what the issue is

Not seeing in big picture is common here. If you read this far I think
I have cleared it up.

But this is what you get when you're good implementers but don't have
a Uriel, someone who sees and/or cares about more than just the code.
You get Mothra as the default in the same system where plumbing is up
and running by default, you get riow in the release *before*
screenlock has been made a 9P server that runs ahead of Rio and
interposes all input on all input devices.

>> Exit is something nobody wants unless they're advanced enough to know
>> about hidden menu commands.
>
> That is a speculation.  Several people wanted an Exit and it was
> enough "wants" to get it in.

The sentence continues past the word "nobody".  Nobody who doesn't
know to just go for the nearest word to "Close" (you don't keep
looking for something once you think you've found it) needs (let alone
wants) Exit.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Sigrid Solveig Haflínudóttir]

You come off as very entitled and full of interesting opinions, I
especially like this gem:

> You get Mothra as the default in the same system where plumbing is up
> and running by default, you get riow in the release *before*
> screenlock has been made a 9P server that runs ahead of Rio and
> interposes all input on all input devices.

Sorry for people working on things that are more important to them,
not to what your grand ideas are about, I guess.  I'm out of this
conversation.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Jacob Moody]

On 8/10/23 19:17, Sigrid Solveig Haflínudóttir wrote:
> You come off as very entitled and full of interesting opinions, I
> especially like this gem:
> 
>> You get Mothra as the default in the same system where plumbing is up
>> and running by default, you get riow in the release *before*
>> screenlock has been made a 9P server that runs ahead of Rio and
>> interposes all input on all input devices.
> 

Hear hear. I particularly like Stuart's part about refusing to write
the code.

Sorry Stuart, people are not writing code for you, no matter how
much you bitch on the mailing list. I don't know how you got it in to your
head that we are here to serve you or your opinions. If you think you know
what the priorities should be, and how to best solve these problems then
just like fucking do it.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Stuart Morrow]

> Hear hear.

This is in response to it being laughable, "a gem", to comment on two
pairs of mutually-incompatible things appearing in the same software
distribution.

I truly don't get why that's a hear-hear moment.

> I particularly like Stuart's part about refusing to write
> the code.

I'm not a programmer (like the vast majority of people that ever used
a Unix-like operating system), and to the extent that I _can_ be
called one (is a hunt-and-peck typist "a typist"), I don't enjoy the
process.

And I'm not keen on touching what I think is one of the biggest programs.

And quasimodal typing seems like it would be outside of what you can
directly do with the libraries, kind of like if you wanted a stats(1)
that draws its (massive)menu outside of its (usually small)window.

> Sorry Stuart, people are not writing code for you, no matter how
> much you bitch on the mailing list. I don't know how you got it in to your
> head that we are here to serve you or your opinions. If you think you know
> what the priorities should be, and how to best solve these problems then
> just like fucking do it.

Really not seeing how you got it in your head(s?) that that's in my head.

I had an idea between posts(which is why it's not in the first post,
or the subject line)(ditto for switching on $service) about an
intellectually-satisfying design seeming to solve three known problems
that don't obviously have anything to do with each other.

Given that I know both how to close a window and how to exit rio, and
don't have a need for directing focus of keyboard commands in a way
that's elegant (because I don't use keyboard commands), I'm more
interested in the idea than in having it.

And now have I spend almost all of this thread dealing with either
strawmen or misreadings.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Jacob Moody]

On 8/11/23 07:31, Stuart Morrow wrote:
>> Hear hear.
> 
> This is in response to it being laughable, "a gem", to comment on two
> pairs of mutually-incompatible things appearing in the same software
> distribution.
> 
> I truly don't get why that's a hear-hear moment.

I was agreeing that you were being an entitled. That's all.

> 
>> I particularly like Stuart's part about refusing to write
>> the code.
> 
> I'm not a programmer (like the vast majority of people that ever used
> a Unix-like operating system), and to the extent that I _can_ be
> called one (is a hunt-and-peck typist "a typist"), I don't enjoy the
> process.

Then to be perfectly honest I don't care for your opinion on the system,
how it works, or how it should work. Learn to do it or stop bitching.
If you spent even a quarter of your time that you do bitching you would
know enough to actually provide something useful.

>> Sorry Stuart, people are not writing code for you, no matter how
>> much you bitch on the mailing list. I don't know how you got it in to your
>> head that we are here to serve you or your opinions. If you think you know
>> what the priorities should be, and how to best solve these problems then
>> just like fucking do it.
> 
> Really not seeing how you got it in your head(s?) that that's in my head.

Quite simple actually, you come in here demanding that we all bend to your
idea of what the order of things should be (screenlock before riow, making
it a fileserver, etc).

> 
> And now have I spend almost all of this thread dealing with either
> strawmen or misreadings.

Here I am spending time on someone that will never provide us with
anything of value and seems only interested in making noise in some
vein attempt at convincing people that, without being a programmer,
know how everyone else should program.

If you just fucked off from the mailing list, nothing of value would
be lost.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Stuart Morrow]

On 11/08/2023, Jacob Moody <moody@posixcafe.org> wrote:
> If you just fucked off from the mailing list, nothing of value would
> be lost.

I won't talk to you then. I have no desire to be annoying you *plus*
you've doubled down on claiming to know what my words mean better than
I do.

Demanding stuff isn't something people do in general, so if it isn't
being said literally and you think you're seeing it, you might take a
step back and attempt a more likely interpretation.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Jacob Moody]

On 8/11/23 15:38, Stuart Morrow wrote:
> On 11/08/2023, Jacob Moody <moody@posixcafe.org> wrote:
>> If you just fucked off from the mailing list, nothing of value would
>> be lost.
> 
> I won't talk to you then.

Good. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

> I have no desire to be annoying you *plus*
> you've doubled down on claiming to know what my words mean better than
> I do.

I am not claiming to know your words better then you do, you type words
and I have to read them and interpret them as part of reading.
It seems like a common theme that no one else here is capable of understanding
your genius. It seems like your "intelectually-satisfying" insights are wasted on us.
I recommend you find some other group of programmers willing to do the work for you.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[hiro]

> I won't talk to you then. I have no desire to be annoying you *plus*
> you've doubled down on claiming to know what my words mean better than
> I do.

all anybody here can tell is what your words do *not* mean. I doubt
moody managed to interprete too much sense into them, don't worry.

> Demanding stuff isn't something people do in general

Wrong.

> so if it isn't
> being said literally and you think you're seeing it, you might take a
> step back and attempt a more likely interpretation.

No.

I have no fucking clue what you're seeing and by now I lost all
interest to speculate in your favour.

And about that YouTube link: Too long didn't watch.

Please spare us from more non-technical content.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[hiro]

> I'm not a programmer (like the vast majority of people that ever used
> a Unix-like operating system), and to the extent that I _can_ be
> called one (is a hunt-and-peck typist "a typist"), I don't enjoy the
> process.

I'm not a programmer either, but I don't know why this would be
relevant to unix systems, on which - as you mention - even typists can
get work done easily with simple scripts, trivial tools, trivial input
and output, pipes.
What process are you complaining about, the process that one could
have called you a programmer?

What does the majority of people have to do say about our niche
distributed network operating system programming environment? Why do
you bring those up? Also what have these majorities ever done for US?
or YOU?

> And I'm not keen on touching what I think is one of the biggest programs.

Some masochists will get around to it sooner or later.

> And quasimodal typing seems like it would be outside of what you can
> directly do with the libraries

why?

> Really not seeing how you got it in your head(s?) that that's in my head.

It's all in our heads you say? nice continuation of the theme.

> And now have I spend almost all of this thread dealing with either
> strawmen or misreadings.

please work on your grammar. it's impossible to tell if this is a
question or exclamation. the rest was so unintelligible that I
refrained from quoting it.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Johnpaul Humphrey]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 256 bytes --]

At this point I am only reading for entertainment. Are you still talking
about something, or are you talking about each other talking about you
talking about something. Im in no position to tell you to stop, so pretend
that's not what im trying to hint at

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 283 bytes --]

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[hiro]

> At this point I am only reading for entertainment. Are you still talking about something, or are you talking about each other talking about you talking about something. Im in no position to tell you to stop, so pretend that's not what im trying to hint at

we do not accept abuse here and I reject the idea that this
nonconsensual shit is entertaining to anybody.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Stuart Morrow]

> What process are you complaining about,

Say what you will but I am not just making terms up.

https://youtu.be/Bew7Vum5piI?t=215

^ not me

>> And now have I spend almost all of this thread dealing with either
>> strawmen or misreadings.
>
> please work on your grammar. it's impossible to tell if this is a
> question or exclamation. the rest was so unintelligible that I
> refrained from quoting it.

Whoops, s/have I spend/I have spent.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Stanley Lieber]

i think there is a lot of crosstalk and confusion here, and i for one am not even clear what anyone in this thread actually wants. probably just writing a complete spec for what you want and then posting it on the mailing list and then waiting for everyone to never ever mention it again would be more coherent than this current who's on first routine (see also: the long languishing proposal for a new bug tracker). another alternative would be implementing the thing you want and then posting diffs on the mailing list and waiting for it to get shot down. what doesn't help is oblique references to a dude who ran windows on his thinkpad for the last year of his life and isn't here to defend himself.

there is room for throwing stones at a lot of stuff in plan 9, even before 9front came along. what's great about the past few years is so much experimentation and new stuff to argue about. the very best part is that, unlike the status quo when uriel was alive, all these folks are actually sharing code. we've come a long way.

sl

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Nathan Gorvett]

Hey all!

This was my presentation :D I'm happy y'all found it but I didn't do
enough prep work imo.

Unless I'm misunderstanding what's going on here. I had been away from
9front for a few months and just figured it'd be nice to showcase 9 to
the lug.

On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 11:41 AM Sigrid Solveig Haflínudóttir
<sigrid@ftrv.se> wrote:
>
> > The discussion should have been should it be enabled at all.
>
> That's just, like, your opinion, man.
> We have discussions on #cat-v and on grid.
> Everybody is welcome to join in.
> But no, better speculate elsewhere (reddit, discord, whatever)
> then complain about artwork touching here, on the ML.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[hiro]

no problem Nathan. :P

to all the others fighting with Stuart:
please hold back for a second and please explain:
what is this q to quit thing?! where do I type q to quit?!

thank you from the audience.

On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 2:34 AM Nathan Gorvett <nathan@nzm.ca> wrote:
>
> Hey all!
>
> This was my presentation :D I'm happy y'all found it but I didn't do
> enough prep work imo.
>
> Unless I'm misunderstanding what's going on here. I had been away from
> 9front for a few months and just figured it'd be nice to showcase 9 to
> the lug.
>
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 11:41 AM Sigrid Solveig Haflínudóttir
> <sigrid@ftrv.se> wrote:
> >
> > > The discussion should have been should it be enabled at all.
> >
> > That's just, like, your opinion, man.
> > We have discussions on #cat-v and on grid.
> > Everybody is welcome to join in.
> > But no, better speculate elsewhere (reddit, discord, whatever)
> > then complain about artwork touching here, on the ML.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Stuart Morrow]

> what is this q to quit thing?! where do I type q to quit?!

Stats, lens, the image viewers, page, and more.  Paint and proof, too,
if a command-line q counts.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Jacob Moody]

> On Aug 9, 2023, at 19:21, Stuart Morrow <morrow.stuart@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Apparently "Exit" is confusable with "Delete".
> 

Sounds like a skill issue.

Re: [9front] "Touching the Artwork" strikes again

[Stanley Lieber]

On August 9, 2023 8:08:16 PM EDT, Jacob Moody <moody@posixcafe.org> wrote:
>
>
>> On Aug 9, 2023, at 19:21, Stuart Morrow <morrow.stuart@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Apparently "Exit" is confusable with "Delete".
>> 
>
>Sounds like a skill issue.
>

it has a skull and crossbones, wake up sheeple