From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juanma Barranquero Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: How to restore the layout? Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 14:08:57 +0200 Message-ID: References: <51C5AA68.4000204@alice.it> <51C8B2C8.4000803@gmx.at> <51C93CDB.2020301@gmx.at> <51C9C790.3020407@gmx.at> <51CA0D4C.7080204@alice.it> <51CC3E42.7020409@alice.it> <51CC4CC1.3030202@alice.it> <51CC8403.1030009@gmx.at> <51CCA56A.8000508@gmx.at> <51CD49CF.1090103@gmx.at> <51CD5489.10902@gmx.at> <2FB4C583-960C-4DA8-8B2E-29DF8D96770E@swipnet.se> <83d2r6fsbw.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1372421426 19988 80.91.229.3 (28 Jun 2013 12:10:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 12:10:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Stephen Berman , Angelo Graziosi , Emacs developers , martin rudalics , Stefan Monnier , =?UTF-8?Q?Jan_Dj=C3=A4rv?= , Jambunathan K To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 28 14:10:26 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UsXVR-0002wf-KS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 14:10:25 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55043 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UsXVR-0003nD-46 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 08:10:25 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54332) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UsXUs-00035P-8P for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 08:09:56 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UsXUm-0002ua-MY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 08:09:50 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-ie0-x232.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4001:c03::232]:50697) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UsXUg-0002tZ-Bs; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 08:09:38 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-ie0-f178.google.com with SMTP id u16so4043688iet.9 for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 05:09:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=1gp6FRsikeueUoIpwGvlfBcS6BFhhDLF4ARfdeKaOto=; b=gEUAR8McCDMgMk+jiSTPaeb2zrFyMzA1umNXiBa1oCyLPulzYT4jiQiWKCuUBhDHzl 84TqF36sq8Tko/r8Z5ViFIJ4itR2ZSV/nNUi1d1QvUujRmOIsDvL/WTPz69o5D0gfCYn x14ZTgchalnJaiR6eKsF+8+gBySxlpQCf5oLR1i3vjaGCxGDW4NviS0kZOWC7HarFbnA YcK5f0QGDGW+R07yWOELK+MyIPNnKd5nBHTdkK4BAtpbJKtfLUOd/XFZ2YteTofY3Mho b++8rwp17C3kfQpVn9/ZXFloLUXllZL8EZVdgh5oiwHC69CrjLjSRyVjtJedBsQYSCjD MllQ== X-Received: by 10.50.2.67 with SMTP id 3mr3600569igs.11.1372421377718; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 05:09:37 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.64.126.161 with HTTP; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 05:08:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83d2r6fsbw.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4001:c03::232 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:161190 Archived-At: On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > FWIW, I agree. Maximizing a frame is just one mouse click away, so > going to great length just to restore that is not a good idea, > especially, as Jan points out, it will not be 100% correct anyway. If we can get it to be correct 95% of time, that's a net gain. I certainly don't want to throw the towel without trying to make it work first. > Just make sure we re-create all those frames, and if they need to be > resized or moved, be it by the window manager or manually, so be it. > It will already be a great improvement from what we had before, > whereby users would have manually recreate every frame. For some users/use cases, not for others. We can add an option, and even make it default if people insists, but not as the only behavior. J