9front - general discussion about 9front
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
@ 2021-08-09 22:59 Silas McCroskey
  2021-08-10 14:19 ` ori
  2021-08-16 19:40 ` ori
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Silas McCroskey @ 2021-08-09 22:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1039 bytes --]

fgui uses libcontrol, which defaults to hover-focus. This is both
inconsistent with the rest of the system (bar acme) and potentially
dangerous in fgui's specific case, due to the secrets involved.

The following patch turns the libcontrol knob to switch to click-to-focus.

Not sure this merits being merged per se, but it's at least here for
anyone else to pick up.

Attached as well since gmail will inevitably mangle it.

- sam-d

---

/mnt/git/object/40fc48cc7bd2bf10bb304e6d1212abcde6c15066/tree/sys/src/cmd/auth/factotum/fgui.c
+++ sys/src/cmd/auth/factotum/fgui.c
@@ -294,6 +294,7 @@
  /* create a new control set for the confirmation */
  openkmr();
  cs = newcontrolset(screen, kbdc, mousec, resizec);
+ cs->clicktotype = 1;

  createtext(cs, "msg");
  chanprint(cs->ctl, "msg image paleyellow");
@@ -534,6 +535,7 @@
  /* create a new control set for the confirmation */
  openkmr();
  cs = newcontrolset(screen, kbdc, mousec, resizec);
+ cs->clicktotype = 1;

  /* count attributes and allocate entry controls */
  entries = 0;

[-- Attachment #2: fgui-clickfocus.patch --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 605 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-09 22:59 [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui Silas McCroskey
@ 2021-08-10 14:19 ` ori
  2021-08-11  5:28   ` rgl
  2021-08-16 19:40 ` ori
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: ori @ 2021-08-10 14:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

Quoth Silas McCroskey <inkswinc@gmail.com>:
> fgui uses libcontrol, which defaults to hover-focus. This is both
> inconsistent with the rest of the system (bar acme) and potentially
> dangerous in fgui's specific case, due to the secrets involved.
> 

Makes sense to me -- I'm in favor of committing.
I'd also be in favor of making clicktotype the
default in libcontrol.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-10 14:19 ` ori
@ 2021-08-11  5:28   ` rgl
  2021-08-11 20:49     ` Philip Silva
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: rgl @ 2021-08-11  5:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

> I'd also be in favor of making clicktotype the
> default in libcontrol.

I'd prefer this instead of just fixing fgui, even
if it's the only program using libcontrol atm.
it's a better default.


-rodri


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-11  5:28   ` rgl
@ 2021-08-11 20:49     ` Philip Silva
  2021-08-11 21:09       ` Steve Simon
                         ` (3 more replies)
  0 siblings, 4 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Philip Silva @ 2021-08-11 20:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

Hover to focus can be quite practical though I think.

> I'd prefer this instead of just fixing fgui, even
>
> if it's the only program using libcontrol atm.
>
> it's a better default.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-11 20:49     ` Philip Silva
@ 2021-08-11 21:09       ` Steve Simon
  2021-08-11 22:37       ` Xiao-Yong Jin
                         ` (2 subsequent siblings)
  3 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Steve Simon @ 2021-08-11 21:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front


hover is the focus strategy of the devil.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-11 20:49     ` Philip Silva
  2021-08-11 21:09       ` Steve Simon
@ 2021-08-11 22:37       ` Xiao-Yong Jin
  2021-08-12  9:05         ` hiro
  2021-08-12  0:12       ` hiro
  2021-08-15  4:29       ` ori
  3 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: Xiao-Yong Jin @ 2021-08-11 22:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front


> On Aug 11, 2021, at 3:49 PM, Philip Silva <philip.silva@protonmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hover to focus can be quite practical though I think.

Focus-Follows-Mouse and Click-To-Raise.
I miss the ability of focusing a window without it being on top.

A digression: https://wiki.c2.com/?FocusFollowsMouse

I guess I really want the focus following my eyes.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-11 20:49     ` Philip Silva
  2021-08-11 21:09       ` Steve Simon
  2021-08-11 22:37       ` Xiao-Yong Jin
@ 2021-08-12  0:12       ` hiro
  2021-08-15  4:29       ` ori
  3 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: hiro @ 2021-08-12  0:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

> Hover to focus can be quite practical though I think.

maybe. but this is about consistency.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-11 22:37       ` Xiao-Yong Jin
@ 2021-08-12  9:05         ` hiro
  2021-08-12 14:36           ` Eckard Brauer
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: hiro @ 2021-08-12  9:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

> I guess I really want the focus following my eyes.

no you really don't

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-12  9:05         ` hiro
@ 2021-08-12 14:36           ` Eckard Brauer
  2021-08-13  6:44             ` unobe
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: Eckard Brauer @ 2021-08-12 14:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

> > I guess I really want the focus following my eyes.  
> 
> no you really don't

I'd rather want focus to follow the mouse lazily as long as there's a
possibility to switch/cycle windows with the keyboard. So I usually
don't have an idea where the mouse pointer is left and do most of the
work with the keyboard. Mouse is only used for selecting/pasting.

But that's not much approved (and maybe possible at all) on Plan 9.
IMHO it'd be best to leave the user to choose, if it's with a path or
compile time #ifdefs, it would be fine for me.


-- 
Corona? Ich desinfiziere regelmäßig mit Bier. 
What Corona? I regularly disinfect with beer.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-12 14:36           ` Eckard Brauer
@ 2021-08-13  6:44             ` unobe
  2021-08-13  7:10               ` hiro
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: unobe @ 2021-08-13  6:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

Quoth Eckard Brauer <eckard.brauer@gmx.de>:
> > > I guess I really want the focus following my eyes.  
> > 
> > no you really don't
> 
> I'd rather want focus to follow the mouse lazily as long as there's a
> possibility to switch/cycle windows with the keyboard. So I usually
> don't have an idea where the mouse pointer is left and do most of the
> work with the keyboard. Mouse is only used for selecting/pasting.
> 
> But that's not much approved (and maybe possible at all) on Plan 9.
> IMHO it'd be best to leave the user to choose, if it's with a path or
> compile time #ifdefs, it would be fine for me.

Has anyone played with having the mouse cursor always followed the
keyboard location, rather than the mouse always determining focus?

I'm trying to think of times when I really need to have the mouse stay
wherever it is on the screen while typing.  More often than not, I
have to move the mouse if it's over a couple letters that I need to
see and perhaps it would be easier to always know where it is (the
keyboard cursor when not being actively used).  I think that might
make it faster to write out something to run, copy, paste, etc.: most
of the interactions I used the mouse in conjunction with the keyboard
for.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-13  6:44             ` unobe
@ 2021-08-13  7:10               ` hiro
  2021-08-14 10:20                 ` Eckard Brauer
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: hiro @ 2021-08-13  7:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

> But that's not much approved (and maybe possible at all) on Plan 9.
> IMHO it'd be best to leave the user to choose, if it's with a path or
> compile time #ifdefs, it would be fine for me.

of course it's possible! and who cares what's approved?! and we
definitely don't approve of #ifdefs, so what is this? some form of
trolling?

the tradition on plan9 is to have one single, consistent, sane default
whenever possible, so nope... making it user configurable goes against
everything we stand for.

if you want to experiment with shitty windowmanagers that get all
triggerhappy whenever you look at your mouse sideways there's a lot
out there for linux that you could try. please do this first (like
most other people have already done here) and feel the suffering
before you share more opinions.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-13  7:10               ` hiro
@ 2021-08-14 10:20                 ` Eckard Brauer
  2021-08-14 13:09                   ` qwx
                                     ` (5 more replies)
  0 siblings, 6 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Eckard Brauer @ 2021-08-14 10:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

Am Fri, 13 Aug 2021 09:10:47 +0200
schrieb hiro <23hiro@gmail.com>:
> of course it's possible! and who cares what's approved?! and we
> definitely don't approve of #ifdefs, so what is this? some form of
> trolling?

So far you're free to treat that as whatever you want. As you seem to
hate the discussion and maybe the participants of it, it's probably of
much more value if you sit down and write a Plan9 bible with all se
do's and dont's well ordered by precedence. That way you could have a
better chance to avoid such discussions for the future and simply
remind people to "read the fucking guide of dogmas".

regarding the #ifdefs, I completely conform with the idea of mostly
avoiding them. My suggestion was _never_ to introduce them, but to have
different choice possible (see the typo, corrected here) "with patch or
[..] #ifdefs", so either possibility could have been fine, and the
default behaviour would be kept.

> the tradition on plan9 is to have one single, consistent, sane default
> whenever possible, so nope... making it user configurable goes against
> everything we stand for.

OK, but see above with documentation. If the topic is that dogmatically
overloaded, it _needs_ to be documented in somewhere strictly before
all user guides and the like. But, hey, why then does rio have a -b
option or do patches for changing the color scheme exist? It's not
standard anymore... or why does Plan 9 support keyboard layouts at all
and doesn't enforce all keyboards of US type? OK, I see some of the
differences, but you will always hit points where to decide to support
something formerly unsupported and not covered by any explicit or
implicit (single-brain?) standard.

Simply think of networking hardware and see what was supported years
before, what is now, and what probably will be some years later. That's
btw my personal reason for not actually being able to switch to Plan 9
for my everyday OS, as I could well live with click-to-focus, if it
were the only point. That's indeed not a matter of only user
experience, but of hardware support, but why trying to support many new
hardware, but not the users, when maybe a large enough group has
different ideas of usability?

That's a matter of flexibility too, and strictly enfocing the "one and
only way" everywhere will maybe lead to the most efficient "one man's
OS". Please come up with real arguments, not "it was everytime this way
and not different, and so it has to remain". That's really shitty.
Nobody can resist good reasons and explanations, and if there's a dogma
left to _never_at_no_single_time_ support something, it has at least to
be stated somewhere, well visible and clear for every single person.

> if you want to experiment with shitty windowmanagers that get all
> triggerhappy whenever you look at your mouse sideways there's a lot
> out there for linux that you could try. please do this first (like
> most other people have already done here) and feel the suffering
> before you share more opinions.

As already written, it's _not_ a matter of supporting all "shitty
windowmanagers" or "but my Windoze has that" or such. As I'm currently
unable to use Plan 9 as my everyday OS, I'm currently on Linux. I hate
that and would be willing to switch, if some more things work. And I
simply exposed an opinion of how I'm working most of the time. If that
is enough to disqualify me from talking here, please send a note and
drop me from that list, if not, tell arguments and get it documented at
where that belongs.

Up to now, I didn't find a strong counterargument against a different
focus policy, but am still open to know that.

--

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-14 10:20                 ` Eckard Brauer
@ 2021-08-14 13:09                   ` qwx
  2021-08-14 15:03                     ` Stuart Morrow
  2021-08-14 13:17                   ` José Miguel Sánchez García
                                     ` (4 subsequent siblings)
  5 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: qwx @ 2021-08-14 13:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

Hi,

For my part, I agree with Eckard.  There's no central authority
here.  Opinions differ on everything.  There's plenty of
debatable changes in the tree, and plenty of the remaining labs
artwork is questioned (like devdraw, rio,... *acme*).

Personally, I welcome any experiments.  I've stupidly resisted
many ideas until I tried them, like Sigrid's riow which I now
can't imagine not using.  Nothing prevents you or anyone else
from implementing something different, regardless of whether or
not it ends up in the tree.

*imho* just write the code.  I'd like to try some of the ideas
thrown around here at least.

Cheers,

qwx

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-14 10:20                 ` Eckard Brauer
  2021-08-14 13:09                   ` qwx
@ 2021-08-14 13:17                   ` José Miguel Sánchez García
  2021-08-14 20:57                     ` Patch-keeping (Was Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui) unobe
  2021-08-14 15:04                   ` [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui Stuart Morrow
                                     ` (3 subsequent siblings)
  5 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: José Miguel Sánchez García @ 2021-08-14 13:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

My argument against focus-follows-mouse is that it's inconsistent with
how everything works in 9, and IMHO, 9 is about consistency:
"everything is a file" is a cool slogan for "we have a consistent
model to label and locate resources". Rio doesn't have a lot of fancy
features because it aims to be a simple and predictable "rectangle
multiplexer" (as sl says in his webpage). The plumber is a consistent,
system-wide hyperlinking solution.

Wanting focus-follows-mouse is reasonable. Wanting in-tree support for
that in 9, not so much. #ifdefs are pointless, as they are a kind of
sloppy, inline patch that makes the code harder to understand. I think
patching is the way to go. And I'm personally one of those who keep a
collection of patches I apply automatically after each 9front
installation because I love customizing my system (currently I'm
changing colors, menus, keybinds...).

Cheers,
jmi2k

On Sat, Aug 14, 2021 at 2:24 PM Eckard Brauer <eckard.brauer@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> Am Fri, 13 Aug 2021 09:10:47 +0200
> schrieb hiro <23hiro@gmail.com>:
> > of course it's possible! and who cares what's approved?! and we
> > definitely don't approve of #ifdefs, so what is this? some form of
> > trolling?
>
> So far you're free to treat that as whatever you want. As you seem to
> hate the discussion and maybe the participants of it, it's probably of
> much more value if you sit down and write a Plan9 bible with all se
> do's and dont's well ordered by precedence. That way you could have a
> better chance to avoid such discussions for the future and simply
> remind people to "read the fucking guide of dogmas".
>
> regarding the #ifdefs, I completely conform with the idea of mostly
> avoiding them. My suggestion was _never_ to introduce them, but to have
> different choice possible (see the typo, corrected here) "with patch or
> [..] #ifdefs", so either possibility could have been fine, and the
> default behaviour would be kept.
>
> > the tradition on plan9 is to have one single, consistent, sane default
> > whenever possible, so nope... making it user configurable goes against
> > everything we stand for.
>
> OK, but see above with documentation. If the topic is that dogmatically
> overloaded, it _needs_ to be documented in somewhere strictly before
> all user guides and the like. But, hey, why then does rio have a -b
> option or do patches for changing the color scheme exist? It's not
> standard anymore... or why does Plan 9 support keyboard layouts at all
> and doesn't enforce all keyboards of US type? OK, I see some of the
> differences, but you will always hit points where to decide to support
> something formerly unsupported and not covered by any explicit or
> implicit (single-brain?) standard.
>
> Simply think of networking hardware and see what was supported years
> before, what is now, and what probably will be some years later. That's
> btw my personal reason for not actually being able to switch to Plan 9
> for my everyday OS, as I could well live with click-to-focus, if it
> were the only point. That's indeed not a matter of only user
> experience, but of hardware support, but why trying to support many new
> hardware, but not the users, when maybe a large enough group has
> different ideas of usability?
>
> That's a matter of flexibility too, and strictly enfocing the "one and
> only way" everywhere will maybe lead to the most efficient "one man's
> OS". Please come up with real arguments, not "it was everytime this way
> and not different, and so it has to remain". That's really shitty.
> Nobody can resist good reasons and explanations, and if there's a dogma
> left to _never_at_no_single_time_ support something, it has at least to
> be stated somewhere, well visible and clear for every single person.
>
> > if you want to experiment with shitty windowmanagers that get all
> > triggerhappy whenever you look at your mouse sideways there's a lot
> > out there for linux that you could try. please do this first (like
> > most other people have already done here) and feel the suffering
> > before you share more opinions.
>
> As already written, it's _not_ a matter of supporting all "shitty
> windowmanagers" or "but my Windoze has that" or such. As I'm currently
> unable to use Plan 9 as my everyday OS, I'm currently on Linux. I hate
> that and would be willing to switch, if some more things work. And I
> simply exposed an opinion of how I'm working most of the time. If that
> is enough to disqualify me from talking here, please send a note and
> drop me from that list, if not, tell arguments and get it documented at
> where that belongs.
>
> Up to now, I didn't find a strong counterargument against a different
> focus policy, but am still open to know that.
>
> --

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-14 13:09                   ` qwx
@ 2021-08-14 15:03                     ` Stuart Morrow
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Stuart Morrow @ 2021-08-14 15:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

On 14/08/2021, qwx <qwx@sciops.net> wrote:
> Personally, I welcome any experiments.

I don't want to be the one to kick off one of "these" threads, but...
what if that mouse clipping notion could be generalised to rectangles
OUTSIDE of the window as well as inside, for instance the entire
screen, so that

1. lens(1) has a way to tell rio that it needs to do what it needs to do
2. a program can warp the mouse in riostart instead of in profile
which is where I currently do it.

Number 1 would solve what is basically a design flaw.  (Plus, you have
access to more information in riostart than in profile  - e.g. can
calculate the barycentre of all windows ...I wouldn't use this.)

As long as we're accepting that programs can do this, then why not
further say that the window manager can (by the same mechanism) ask to
see that the mouse goes outside of the entire SCREEN (as in, negative
coordinates if it's above or to the left of the screen)?

Then you could do the thing Windows 7 does where if the current window
is partly off-screen, you can bring it back by pushing against the
edge. Useless, except that it would give you a way to do PaperWM with
just the mouse.

I was never really pro-that patch before because I thought it didn't
actually do anything for you.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-14 10:20                 ` Eckard Brauer
  2021-08-14 13:09                   ` qwx
  2021-08-14 13:17                   ` José Miguel Sánchez García
@ 2021-08-14 15:04                   ` Stuart Morrow
  2021-08-14 18:08                   ` hiro
                                     ` (2 subsequent siblings)
  5 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Stuart Morrow @ 2021-08-14 15:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

> why then does rio have a -b option
Bad taste.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-14 10:20                 ` Eckard Brauer
                                     ` (2 preceding siblings ...)
  2021-08-14 15:04                   ` [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui Stuart Morrow
@ 2021-08-14 18:08                   ` hiro
  2021-08-14 21:43                     ` unobe
  2021-08-14 21:46                   ` unobe
  2021-08-15 17:31                   ` kvik
  5 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: hiro @ 2021-08-14 18:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

> So far you're free to treat that as whatever you want. As you seem to
> hate the discussion and maybe the participants of it

thanks for making it easy for me so I know i can stop reading already
after the second sentence.
both statements are untrue.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Patch-keeping (Was Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui)
  2021-08-14 13:17                   ` José Miguel Sánchez García
@ 2021-08-14 20:57                     ` unobe
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: unobe @ 2021-08-14 20:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

Quoth José Miguel Sánchez García <soy.jmi2k@gmail.com>:
> Wanting focus-follows-mouse is reasonable. Wanting in-tree support for
> that in 9, not so much. #ifdefs are pointless, as they are a kind of
> sloppy, inline patch that makes the code harder to understand. I think
> patching is the way to go. And I'm personally one of those who keep a
> collection of patches I apply automatically after each 9front
> installation because I love customizing my system (currently I'm
> changing colors, menus, keybinds...).

Just curious about your patch-keeping procedure: by keeping around a
collection of patches, do you just have a separate branch that you
merge master changes to, or is it really a collection of patches
outside of a repo?


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-14 18:08                   ` hiro
@ 2021-08-14 21:43                     ` unobe
  2021-08-15  6:47                       ` hiro
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: unobe @ 2021-08-14 21:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

Quoth hiro <23hiro@gmail.com>:
> > So far you're free to treat that as whatever you want. As you seem to
> > hate the discussion and maybe the participants of it
> 
> thanks for making it easy for me so I know i can stop reading already
> after the second sentence.
> both statements are untrue.

I'm not understanding your line of reasoning, hiro: his first
statement is untrue?  You (hiro) are not free to treat that (i.e., his
previous e-mail's content) as whatever you want (e.g., some sort of
trolling)?

For the second sentence, you only quoted the premise: Eckard said you
"seem"--it's his perspective.  If his perspective is not true, that's
not the same as his statement re: his perspective not being true.[1]
You can just say that his perspective (i.e, "hiro hate[s] the
discussion and maybe the participants of it") isn't true, or just
ignore the first paragraph entirely.  If the premise is untrue, then
his conclusion ("it's probably of much more value if you sit down and
write a Plan9 bible with all se do's and dont's well ordered by
precedence") does not necessarily follow.  After the first paragraph,
the rest of his e-mail is mainly focused on the issue.  He is open to
discussion.  He ends his e-mail with: "Up to now, I didn't find a
strong counterargument against a different focus policy, but am still
open to know that."

[1] The difference between "She seems to be angry" and she actually
being angry.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-14 10:20                 ` Eckard Brauer
                                     ` (3 preceding siblings ...)
  2021-08-14 18:08                   ` hiro
@ 2021-08-14 21:46                   ` unobe
  2021-08-15 13:36                     ` Eckard Brauer
  2021-08-15 17:31                   ` kvik
  5 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: unobe @ 2021-08-14 21:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

Quoth Eckard Brauer <eckard.brauer@gmx.de>:
> So far you're free to treat that as whatever you want. As you seem to
> hate the discussion and maybe the participants of it, it's probably of
> much more value if you sit down and write a Plan9 bible with all se
> do's and dont's well ordered by precedence. That way you could have a
> better chance to avoid such discussions for the future and simply
> remind people to "read the fucking guide of dogmas".

I don't think this sarcasm was appreciated by hiro--and I think
actually shut down conversation.  If this paragraph was removed, I
think the e-mail would have been better received.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-11 20:49     ` Philip Silva
                         ` (2 preceding siblings ...)
  2021-08-12  0:12       ` hiro
@ 2021-08-15  4:29       ` ori
  3 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: ori @ 2021-08-15  4:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

Quoth Philip Silva <philip.silva@protonmail.com>:
> Hover to focus can be quite practical though I think.

It can be for large screen elements, but
for small input fields, if the mouse drifts
just the least bit as I let go of it, it becomes
unusable for me.

(I can't use acme without the '-b' flag either.)

Since the rest of the system is click to focus,
is there a strong argument for keeping it the
way it is?


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-14 21:43                     ` unobe
@ 2021-08-15  6:47                       ` hiro
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: hiro @ 2021-08-15  6:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

On 8/14/21, unobe@cpan.org <unobe@cpan.org> wrote:
> Quoth hiro <23hiro@gmail.com>:
>> > So far you're free to treat that as whatever you want. As you seem to
>> > hate the discussion and maybe the participants of it
>>
>> thanks for making it easy for me so I know i can stop reading already
>> after the second sentence.
>> both statements are untrue.
>
> I'm not understanding your line of reasoning, hiro: his first
> statement is untrue?  You (hiro) are not free to treat that (i.e., his
> previous e-mail's content) as whatever you want (e.g., some sort of
> trolling)?
>
> For the second sentence, you only quoted the premise: Eckard said you
> "seem"--it's his perspective.  If his perspective is not true, that's
> not the same as his statement re: his perspective not being true.[1]
> You can just say that his perspective (i.e, "hiro hate[s] the
> discussion and maybe the participants of it") isn't true, or just
> ignore the first paragraph entirely.  If the premise is untrue, then
> his conclusion ("it's probably of much more value if you sit down and
> write a Plan9 bible with all se do's and dont's well ordered by
> precedence") does not necessarily follow.  After the first paragraph,
> the rest of his e-mail is mainly focused on the issue.  He is open to
> discussion.  He ends his e-mail with: "Up to now, I didn't find a
> strong counterargument against a different focus policy, but am still
> open to know that."
>
> [1] The difference between "She seems to be angry" and she actually
> being angry.
>
>

wrong.
disclaimer: i'm not an expert in hiro studies.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-14 21:46                   ` unobe
@ 2021-08-15 13:36                     ` Eckard Brauer
  2021-08-15 19:16                       ` hiro
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: Eckard Brauer @ 2021-08-15 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

Am Sat, 14 Aug 2021 14:46:52 -0700
schrieb unobe@cpan.org:

> Quoth Eckard Brauer <eckard.brauer@gmx.de>:
> > So far you're free to treat that as whatever you want. As you seem
> > to hate the discussion and maybe the participants of it, it's
> > probably of much more value if you sit down and write a Plan9 bible
> > with all se do's and dont's well ordered by precedence. That way
> > you could have a better chance to avoid such discussions for the
> > future and simply remind people to "read the fucking guide of
> > dogmas".
>
> I don't think this sarcasm was appreciated by hiro--and I think
> actually shut down conversation.  If this paragraph was removed, I
> think the e-mail would have been better received.
>

I think you're correct, just after thinking about my mail.

It's indeed _not_ that i wanted to offend hiro, as i of cource noticed
that he's one of the most active and productive members here. Only felt
pissed by that he seemed to be angry with the whole topic and took my
likely unqualified arguments (#ifdefs, patching rio's behavious)
without presenting only a single counterargument.

Probably it would have been better to not have written that. So far
sorry for that, but still curious for the counterarguments (and there,
especially hiro's too, of course!), will need those for really
understanding what's correct and what not. Up to now that's not or
rarely documented.

Eckard


--

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-14 10:20                 ` Eckard Brauer
                                     ` (4 preceding siblings ...)
  2021-08-14 21:46                   ` unobe
@ 2021-08-15 17:31                   ` kvik
  2021-08-15 18:34                     ` Kurt H Maier
                                       ` (2 more replies)
  5 siblings, 3 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: kvik @ 2021-08-15 17:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

Quoth Eckard Brauer <eckard.brauer@gmx.de>:
> If the topic is that dogmatically overloaded, it _needs_ to be
> documented in somewhere strictly before all user guides and the like.

It is somewhat of a pattern in this community to assume that everyone
is on the same page for a choice of matters trivial and complex.  You
are supposed to pick up on this by either being unlucky enough to have
similar prior experiences as "us" and can read between the lines very
well, or will learn from hiro that you're an idiot and are better off
installing Linux for not having the community insight accumulated over
the years.

Documentation explaining broad goals and reasoning behind them would
be helpful for the community, and not just newcomers or people who
don't religiously follow #cat-v.  But writing and maintaining such
documentation and often times even following your own advice is much
harder than blasting people.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-15 17:31                   ` kvik
@ 2021-08-15 18:34                     ` Kurt H Maier
  2021-08-15 18:48                     ` Stanley Lieber
  2021-08-15 19:03                     ` hiro
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Kurt H Maier @ 2021-08-15 18:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

On Sun, Aug 15, 2021 at 07:31:45PM +0200, kvik@a-b.xyz wrote:
> Quoth Eckard Brauer <eckard.brauer@gmx.de>:
> > If the topic is that dogmatically overloaded, it _needs_ to be
> > documented in somewhere strictly before all user guides and the like.
> 
> It is somewhat of a pattern in this community to assume that everyone
> is on the same page for a choice of matters trivial and complex. 

It's also somewhat of a pattern in this community to get into an
argument with hiro (or me) and assume he speaks for everyone, then get
mad at "#cat-v" despite the fact that some of the people who commit to
9front don't even participate there.  

Personally I think the better solution is to delete fgui entirely, thus
avoiding the need for all this philosophical documentation you people
seem to want.

More broadly, it's been my experience that people who want to complicate
the code almost never want to stick around to maintain it.  It's a
little easier to accept bikeshedding that's lived in someone's personal
patchset for a few years than the knee-jerk type.

khm

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-15 17:31                   ` kvik
  2021-08-15 18:34                     ` Kurt H Maier
@ 2021-08-15 18:48                     ` Stanley Lieber
  2021-08-15 20:18                       ` Eckard Brauer
  2021-08-15 19:03                     ` hiro
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: Stanley Lieber @ 2021-08-15 18:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

to be fair, it also makes the same people angry.

sl


> On Aug 15, 2021, at 2:39 PM, kvik@a-b.xyz wrote:
> 
> Quoth Eckard Brauer <eckard.brauer@gmx.de>:
>> If the topic is that dogmatically overloaded, it _needs_ to be
>> documented in somewhere strictly before all user guides and the like.
> 
> It is somewhat of a pattern in this community to assume that everyone
> is on the same page for a choice of matters trivial and complex.  You
> are supposed to pick up on this by either being unlucky enough to have
> similar prior experiences as "us" and can read between the lines very
> well, or will learn from hiro that you're an idiot and are better off
> installing Linux for not having the community insight accumulated over
> the years.
> 
> Documentation explaining broad goals and reasoning behind them would
> be helpful for the community, and not just newcomers or people who
> don't religiously follow #cat-v.  But writing and maintaining such
> documentation and often times even following your own advice is much
> harder than blasting people.
> 
> 


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-15 17:31                   ` kvik
  2021-08-15 18:34                     ` Kurt H Maier
  2021-08-15 18:48                     ` Stanley Lieber
@ 2021-08-15 19:03                     ` hiro
  2021-08-16 16:40                       ` kvik
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: hiro @ 2021-08-15 19:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

Kvik, with more documentation about our religion won't it become too
hard for the zealous batch of our new users to break those same strict
rules?

I highly approve the urge of learning to be an idiot.

"matters trivial and complex"

I think there is just one trivial matter here, a choice between 2 or 3
options: either you use click to focus, or not.
You might claim there's a third choice, to use both. I pointed out
that this is inconsistent. Maybe you have a complex reason why it is
not?

Looking from the other direction: Is there anybody who disagrees that
consistency is more important than which of the 2 options are
selected? I might have been quick to assume no.

Sorry if my opinion wasn't clear all along. Thanks for your patience.

On 8/15/21, kvik@a-b.xyz <kvik@a-b.xyz> wrote:
> Quoth Eckard Brauer <eckard.brauer@gmx.de>:
>> If the topic is that dogmatically overloaded, it _needs_ to be
>> documented in somewhere strictly before all user guides and the like.
>
> It is somewhat of a pattern in this community to assume that everyone
> is on the same page for a choice of matters trivial and complex.  You
> are supposed to pick up on this by either being unlucky enough to have
> similar prior experiences as "us" and can read between the lines very
> well, or will learn from hiro that you're an idiot and are better off
> installing Linux for not having the community insight accumulated over
> the years.
>
> Documentation explaining broad goals and reasoning behind them would
> be helpful for the community, and not just newcomers or people who
> don't religiously follow #cat-v.  But writing and maintaining such
> documentation and often times even following your own advice is much
> harder than blasting people.
>
>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-15 13:36                     ` Eckard Brauer
@ 2021-08-15 19:16                       ` hiro
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: hiro @ 2021-08-15 19:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

> that he's one of the most active and productive members here. Only felt
> pissed by that he seemed to be angry with the whole topic
...

I already admitted being very active, but certainly not productive,
unless you count advanced failure in rhetoric, and general swearing at
computers.

I might reconsider sounding pissed at computers once they learn to
obey the rules of game theory. Until then I see no point expressing
anything pleasant about computers.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-15 18:48                     ` Stanley Lieber
@ 2021-08-15 20:18                       ` Eckard Brauer
  2021-08-15 22:35                         ` Stanley Lieber
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: Eckard Brauer @ 2021-08-15 20:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front


> to be fair, it also makes the same people angry.

To maybe end that unlucky story, if "it" in your sentence references to
the last paragraph, it made me angry in a sense of "why the fuck didn't
I know of that?", simply frustration of having no idea what good and
probably well accepted reasons lead to such consensus. Even if i didn't
agree with hiro at a given point, I (mostly) enjoy reading his
statements (and those of many or all the ppl. here).

Sure I know well of the documentation dilemma(s) from experience in a
few companies i worked for. And continuously trying to learn enough of
P9 to better understand and getting to some productivity at all, treat
it as a stupid over-reaction... a friend told me at a time that
"occasionally your (my) blasting fuse is short".

That's been more than enough on the topic from me.

Eckard

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-15 20:18                       ` Eckard Brauer
@ 2021-08-15 22:35                         ` Stanley Lieber
  2021-08-16  5:14                           ` Stanley Lieber
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: Stanley Lieber @ 2021-08-15 22:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

the biggest problem with our various attempts to create documentation is that nobody does (a complete job of) the work. the fqa started as a google code wiki with random contributions by random people, all of whom abandoned the effort. eventually i recovered some of those pieces, edited them into something coherent, and gradually expanded it all into a book. i didn’t ask for permission, but i did try to provide enough historical background and links to outside resources to help a newcomer like i used to be figure out how it all fits together. i didn’t always succeed. for example, fqa6 and fqa7 are especially weak. that’s because i don’t know what i’m talking about. but nobody else is picking up the baton, so i just keep churning out new editions of the same book. to make matters worse, 9front has has made enough changes (file system, auth, usb, wifi, etc.) that non-9front documentation is sometimes more confusing than helpful. everyone always complains about all of this but nobody ever fixes it. the last iteration of this dance rehearsal resulted in the creation of wiki.a-b.xyz (which i instantly mirrored at wiki.9front.org). at that time we (the 9front inner circle, aka the guys wearing those plague masks in EYES WIDE SHUT) discovered a couple of people had, unbeknownst to us, been adding things to the old wiki on code.9front.org (which had been setup during a previous dance rehearsal and ignored by the people who demanded it exist — you see, this is far from our first dance, that’s why we get to wear the funny hats). they were mad because nobody had acknowledged their efforts. okay, dr. bill hartford and his bewildered sense of entitlement. he wasn’t exactly the villain of the piece.

it sucks that people suck at arguing. the solution is to write the document that’s missing and make it available to the community. don’t be confused by the 9front brand; it’s just a rip-off of the old saul bass bell system logo that i use to extract money and prestige from the plan 9 community. if you see something that can be improved, by all means, DO SO, and share it so that others may benefit from your hard work.

rest assured, you will be denigrated and ridiculed for your efforts.*

sl

* seemingly arbitrary contrarianism serves the purpose of sharpening our thinking. don’t get mad, just make more sense.





> On Aug 15, 2021, at 6:05 PM, Eckard Brauer <eckard.brauer@gmx.de> wrote:
> 
> 
>> to be fair, it also makes the same people angry.
> 
> To maybe end that unlucky story, if "it" in your sentence references to
> the last paragraph, it made me angry in a sense of "why the fuck didn't
> I know of that?", simply frustration of having no idea what good and
> probably well accepted reasons lead to such consensus. Even if i didn't
> agree with hiro at a given point, I (mostly) enjoy reading his
> statements (and those of many or all the ppl. here).
> 
> Sure I know well of the documentation dilemma(s) from experience in a
> few companies i worked for. And continuously trying to learn enough of
> P9 to better understand and getting to some productivity at all, treat
> it as a stupid over-reaction... a friend told me at a time that
> "occasionally your (my) blasting fuse is short".
> 
> That's been more than enough on the topic from me.
> 
> Eckard
> 


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-15 22:35                         ` Stanley Lieber
@ 2021-08-16  5:14                           ` Stanley Lieber
  2021-08-16 15:46                             ` Skylar Bleed
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: Stanley Lieber @ 2021-08-16  5:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 85 bytes --]

this kind of format seems promising:

https://compudanzas.net/uxn_tutorial.html

sl


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 319 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-16  5:14                           ` Stanley Lieber
@ 2021-08-16 15:46                             ` Skylar Bleed
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Skylar Bleed @ 2021-08-16 15:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

> this kind of format seems promising:
>
> https://compudanzas.net/uxn_tutorial.html

this tutorial is amazingly good. something like it for 9front would be great

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-15 19:03                     ` hiro
@ 2021-08-16 16:40                       ` kvik
  2021-08-16 19:25                         ` Stuart Morrow
                                           ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: kvik @ 2021-08-16 16:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

Quoth khm <khm@sciops.net>:
> It's also somewhat of a pattern in this community to get into an
> argument with hiro (or me) and assume he speaks for everyone, then get
> mad at "#cat-v" despite the fact that some of the people who commit to
> 9front don't even participate there.

Yes, that is a very common thing to happen.  It is something that I
try to explain to everyone in the wider community who happens to
complain about "#cat-v" being mean and scary.

Maybe I could've made it clearer that the complaint part is about
hiro's method of dealing with people who lack the insider knowledge
only available by studying endless #cat-v chat logs.  What I appeared
to demand is that an #cat-v states *their* assumptions sometimes,
instead of simply demanding everyone instinctively understand how
to approach 9front and discussions around its parts.

(ACHTUNG: on-topic paragraph follows)

An example pertaining to the thread at hand would be a set of UI
design guidelines and goals listing that: text user interfaces are
prefered whenever possible; widget-like things á la libcontrol are
discouraged; click-to-focus is prefered; text input elements should
try to implement similar set of interactions as found in sam or rio;
themeing is a waste of everyone's time; you are free and encouraged
to theme the living shit out of your system just don't expect people
to be as thrilled about it; and so on.

I don't think that's overly "philosophical" or useless or a stretch
to ask for. And no, I'm not volunteering to write such a document
simply because (1) I haven't wrote a single coherent GUI application
in my life and (2) I don't enjoy Plan 9 UI nearly enough to bother
encoding these rules myself.


Quoth Stanley Lieber <sl@stanleylieber.com>:
> the solution is to write the document that’s missing and make it
> available to the community.

I didn't mean to imply the insufficiency of FQA and your work at all.
The only thing I want is for people who have strong feelings about
things to communicate about it effectively.  That may take making
contributions to FQA or the wiki for a more methodical approach, or
just not being too much of an ass to people while trying to educate
them in discussions.

Here's my initial contribution about the topic I feel "strongly"
about: http://wiki.9front.org/fqq


Quoth hiro <23hiro@gmail.com>:
> Kvik, with more documentation about our religion won't it become too
> hard for the zealous batch of our new users to break those same strict
> rules?

No. Knowing the rules is a prerequisite for breaking or improving them
in a reasonable manner.  It helps everyone involved to know where we
are and why.  More so, I don't demand strict adherence to any rules
that are stated.  That'd be a shot in my foot if anything at all
since I'm not nearly sold out on Plan 9 being a godly selection of
great ideas and would like many things to be changed.

> Looking from the other direction: Is there anybody who disagrees that
> consistency is more important than which of the 2 options are
> selected? I might have been quick to assume no.

Yes, consistency is very important -- and is also a great rule to
state clearly for anyone that might not have picked up on this
instinctively by what they saw in Plan 9. You will have to
admit that even though Plan 9 is better in that regard than many
other systems it is not nearly where it could be.

> You might claim there's a third choice, to use both. I pointed out
> that this is inconsistent. Maybe you have a complex reason why it is
> not?

No, I'm all for consistent choice and approve of this change fully.

With "trival and complex matters" I was talking about discussions
ranging from rio's -b flag up to discussions about the details of
9p9999-ioagent or whatever.

> I highly approve the urge of learning to be an idiot.

The art of teaching by this method requires a lot of patience and
understanding from both sides, something that you can't apply in
general and expect great results.  I personally learn the best when
I'm attacked for my idiocy, it is something that I'm used to and that
feels like a sensible repercussion for being an idiot.  But I've not
seen many other people take it the same way, while they *did* take a
more civilized approach in a good way -- meaning they weren't the type
of idiots who demand being served answers on a golden plate, they just
don't hate themselves enough to feel that extra portion of suffering
is a neccessary and acceptable part of their learning.

I'd like if you and some others who are quick to attack would not
assume the worst about people like that, or would at least help them
avoid walking into a trap where they are bound to be pounced on.


P.S. I'm exceedingly sorry for producing this wall of text.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-16 16:40                       ` kvik
@ 2021-08-16 19:25                         ` Stuart Morrow
  2021-08-16 19:40                           ` Kurt H Maier
  2021-08-16 20:04                         ` hiro
  2021-08-16 20:13                         ` hiro
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: Stuart Morrow @ 2021-08-16 19:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

> Here's my initial contribution about the topic I feel "strongly"
> about: http://wiki.9front.org/fqq

`page a.txt b.html` needs gs.  So I don't see pdffs completely
replacing gs.  HTML support in pdffs?

A pro-APE point may be "yes but ALL operating systems have a
POSIX-compatibility subsystem".

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-09 22:59 [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui Silas McCroskey
  2021-08-10 14:19 ` ori
@ 2021-08-16 19:40 ` ori
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: ori @ 2021-08-16 19:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

Quoth Silas McCroskey <inkswinc@gmail.com>:
> fgui uses libcontrol, which defaults to hover-focus. This is both
> inconsistent with the rest of the system (bar acme) and potentially
> dangerous in fgui's specific case, due to the secrets involved.
> 
> The following patch turns the libcontrol knob to switch to click-to-focus.
> 
> Not sure this merits being merged per se, but it's at least here for
> anyone else to pick up.
> 
> Attached as well since gmail will inevitably mangle it.
> 
> - sam-d
> 

My counteroffer:

--- //.git/fs/object/913fdf24972dca40feb3201fe4e32c1ab7b7c2c3/tree/sys/src/libcontrol/control.c
+++ sys/src/libcontrol/control.c
@@ -769,6 +769,7 @@
 	cs->data = chancreate(sizeof(char*), 0);
 	cs->resizeexitc = chancreate(sizeof(int), 0);
 	cs->csexitc = chancreate(sizeof(int), 0);
+	cs->clicktotype = 1;
 
 	threadcreate(resizethread, cs, 32*1024);
 	threadcreate(controlsetthread, cs, 32*1024);


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-16 19:25                         ` Stuart Morrow
@ 2021-08-16 19:40                           ` Kurt H Maier
  2021-08-17  2:05                             ` Stanley Lieber
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: Kurt H Maier @ 2021-08-16 19:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 08:25:55PM +0100, Stuart Morrow wrote:
> > Here's my initial contribution about the topic I feel "strongly"
> > about: http://wiki.9front.org/fqq
> 
> `page a.txt b.html` needs gs.  So I don't see pdffs completely
> replacing gs.  HTML support in pdffs?

or perhaps other utilities pop up and page adopts those instead of using
gs as a swiss army chainsaw.  I would *love* to see ghostscript removed
from 9front.

> A pro-APE point may be "yes but ALL operating systems have a
> POSIX-compatibility subsystem".

I agree with the wiki in that APE should exist but I think 9front should
be fully useful without it.  Removing APE from 9front would make it
simpler for those who care to run sigrid's npe or some variant of
Harvey's APE successor, for instance.  

People often act as though removing something from the base 9front
distribution is akin to banishing it forever, and it just ain't so.  A
clean separation would even simplify regression testing.

khm

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-16 16:40                       ` kvik
  2021-08-16 19:25                         ` Stuart Morrow
@ 2021-08-16 20:04                         ` hiro
  2021-08-16 20:13                         ` hiro
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: hiro @ 2021-08-16 20:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

but you've been on #cat-v for ages, kvik. you should know that i will
demand knowledge from any #cat-v person, and not just inside
knowledge. i have all kinds of fights with all kinds of old #cat-v
regulars all the time, precisely because there is no single consensus
on any collection of knowledge.

the pattern you mention most commonly happens just when people are
making some inside-joke, and it's true that for some newcomers they
tend to be very confusing jokes.

but that's not important, i think the relevant wisdom behind is not
kept from anybody, at least not intentionally.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-16 16:40                       ` kvik
  2021-08-16 19:25                         ` Stuart Morrow
  2021-08-16 20:04                         ` hiro
@ 2021-08-16 20:13                         ` hiro
  2021-08-17  1:10                           ` Xiao-Yong Jin
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: hiro @ 2021-08-16 20:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

>> I highly approve the urge of learning to be an idiot.
>
> The art of teaching by this method requires a lot of patience and
> understanding from both sides, something that you can't apply in
> general and expect great results.

let's expect shitty results then.
people shouldn't take themselves so serious. we're all just human
garbage, so let's act accordingly :)

also, i fear people who have to be coerced with nice words to doubt
themselves are not welcome here. by using harsh words we make a point
of not even trying to convince them.
in the end the learning effect is much greater when they realize they
made the decision themselves.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-16 20:13                         ` hiro
@ 2021-08-17  1:10                           ` Xiao-Yong Jin
  2021-08-17  8:11                             ` hiro
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: Xiao-Yong Jin @ 2021-08-17  1:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front


> On Aug 16, 2021, at 3:13 PM, hiro <23hiro@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> also, i fear people who have to be coerced with nice words to doubt
> themselves are not welcome here. by using harsh words we make a point
> of not even trying to convince them.

Conversation ends here and nobody achieved anything.  In the end, the
best result is people learn to ignore some emails; the worst result is
people get angrier.

> in the end the learning effect is much greater when they realize they
> made the decision themselves.


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-16 19:40                           ` Kurt H Maier
@ 2021-08-17  2:05                             ` Stanley Lieber
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Stanley Lieber @ 2021-08-17  2:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

On Aug 16, 2021, at 6:29 PM, Kurt H Maier <khm@sciops.net> wrote:
> 
> People often act as though removing something from the base 9front
> distribution is akin to banishing it forever, and it just ain't so.  A
> clean separation would even simplify regression testing.

this, one thousand times. and many disagreements about program features are easily addressed by simply forking said program and doing whatever you want with it.

i do think people are right to be concerned that once something is removed wholesale from base nobody will make sure it keeps working.

but that’s a labor dispute.

sl



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

* Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui
  2021-08-17  1:10                           ` Xiao-Yong Jin
@ 2021-08-17  8:11                             ` hiro
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: hiro @ 2021-08-17  8:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9front

i prefer having angry people around me, but feel free to subdue
yourself and live in some miracle dream world.

On 8/17/21, Xiao-Yong Jin <meta.jxy@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Aug 16, 2021, at 3:13 PM, hiro <23hiro@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> also, i fear people who have to be coerced with nice words to doubt
>> themselves are not welcome here. by using harsh words we make a point
>> of not even trying to convince them.
>
> Conversation ends here and nobody achieved anything.  In the end, the
> best result is people learn to ignore some emails; the worst result is
> people get angrier.
>
>> in the end the learning effect is much greater when they realize they
>> made the decision themselves.
>
>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2021-08-17 10:26 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-08-09 22:59 [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui Silas McCroskey
2021-08-10 14:19 ` ori
2021-08-11  5:28   ` rgl
2021-08-11 20:49     ` Philip Silva
2021-08-11 21:09       ` Steve Simon
2021-08-11 22:37       ` Xiao-Yong Jin
2021-08-12  9:05         ` hiro
2021-08-12 14:36           ` Eckard Brauer
2021-08-13  6:44             ` unobe
2021-08-13  7:10               ` hiro
2021-08-14 10:20                 ` Eckard Brauer
2021-08-14 13:09                   ` qwx
2021-08-14 15:03                     ` Stuart Morrow
2021-08-14 13:17                   ` José Miguel Sánchez García
2021-08-14 20:57                     ` Patch-keeping (Was Re: [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui) unobe
2021-08-14 15:04                   ` [9front] PATCH: click-to-focus in fgui Stuart Morrow
2021-08-14 18:08                   ` hiro
2021-08-14 21:43                     ` unobe
2021-08-15  6:47                       ` hiro
2021-08-14 21:46                   ` unobe
2021-08-15 13:36                     ` Eckard Brauer
2021-08-15 19:16                       ` hiro
2021-08-15 17:31                   ` kvik
2021-08-15 18:34                     ` Kurt H Maier
2021-08-15 18:48                     ` Stanley Lieber
2021-08-15 20:18                       ` Eckard Brauer
2021-08-15 22:35                         ` Stanley Lieber
2021-08-16  5:14                           ` Stanley Lieber
2021-08-16 15:46                             ` Skylar Bleed
2021-08-15 19:03                     ` hiro
2021-08-16 16:40                       ` kvik
2021-08-16 19:25                         ` Stuart Morrow
2021-08-16 19:40                           ` Kurt H Maier
2021-08-17  2:05                             ` Stanley Lieber
2021-08-16 20:04                         ` hiro
2021-08-16 20:13                         ` hiro
2021-08-17  1:10                           ` Xiao-Yong Jin
2021-08-17  8:11                             ` hiro
2021-08-12  0:12       ` hiro
2021-08-15  4:29       ` ori
2021-08-16 19:40 ` ori

9front - general discussion about 9front

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror https://inbox.vuxu.org/9front

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V1 9front 9front/ https://inbox.vuxu.org/9front \
		9front@9front.org
	public-inbox-index 9front

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.vuxu.org/vuxu.archive.9front


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git