> One reason, it seems to me, is to confine the action to one dvtm/tmux pane
> when selecting a multiline region of text. st has no awareness that its
> window has been divided into more than one pane and therefore cannot wrap the
> selection at pane boundaries.
Ok, makes sense. It's a bit ugly, b
---
Heyho,
of course I forgot to add the respective command line options…
Here you go, should I squash them?
--Markus
tabbed.1 | 26 ++
tabbed.c | 13 ++---
2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tabbed.1 b/tabbed.1
index 177eacd..83a
Markus Teich wrote:
> @@ -81,7 +82,7 @@ typedef struct Client {
> char name[256];
> Window win;
> int tabx;
> - Bool mapped;
> + Bool urgent;
> Bool closed;
> } Client;
Heyho,
I probably should mention, that „mapped“ is not used anymore, so I replaced it.
I hope t
---
Heyho,
I implemented support for urgency hint forwarding in tabbed. If you run
tabbed st -w
and open up e.g. mutt, you now get a nice wm urgency hint if you receive a new
mail.
If a client gets the urgency hint, then tabbed's root window also gets the
urgency hint set. Also the respective
prototype writes:
> Greetings,
>
> On 12.05.2014 18:18, Christoph Lohmann wrote:
>> For example the US navy is using Open Source software to
>> kill people. I can’t really support this.
>
> I also thought about this problem some time ago and asked google about
> a open source license which restri
On 13.05.2014 19:19, Nick wrote:
Peaceful Open Source License
1) It's incompatible with most free software licenses. [0]
2) Copyright law is the wrong place to do this; it covers
distribution - if I take your mail client, load it onto a missile,
and fire the missile, I'm not redistributing you
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 01:46:02PM -0600, Anthony J. Bentley wrote:
> Example: LibreCAD, a fork of QCad, which had been relicensed by the
> authoring company under the GPLv2. LibreCAD wanted to support AutoCAD's
> DWG file format. Unluckily for them, LibreDWG (a FSF project) is licensed
> GPLv3+, a
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 07:28:48PM -0400, Lee Fallat wrote:
[GPL quoted in full]
Could you please take the time to shorten your quotes to the part you
actually want to reply to?
> I've come to adopt the NoLicenseLicense, for sole reason of
> demonstrating to people that many of us code for the sa
Quoth prototype:
> I also thought about this problem some time ago and asked google
> about a open source license which restricts harmful use - and this
> is what i got:
> the "Peaceful Open Source License" [1]:
>
> Clause 1 and 2 come from the BSD 2-Clause license.
> Clause 3 is meant to
Greetings,
On 12.05.2014 18:18, Christoph Lohmann wrote:
> For example the US navy is using Open Source software to
> kill people. I can’t really support this.
I also thought about this problem some time ago and asked google about a
open source license which restricts harmful use - and this is
Hi,
* Anthony J. Bentley 2014-05-13 04:31
> Summaries and general concepts are pointless because they are not what is
> legally in effect. The only sensible license is one that is so simple that
> it needs no summary.
No. Every license, even two lines long, (and even the lack of a license)
puts t
11 matches
Mail list logo
