4 ms·
Both the author of i3 and the author of i3-gaps (who is also a maintainer of i3) originally opposed merging the i3-gaps code because the code was a bit hacky an
by ohazi 4y ago
Both the author of i3 and the author of i3-gaps (who is also a maintainer of i3) originally opposed merging the i3-gaps code because the code was a bit hacky and had certain edge cases where it would break things (e.g. you couldn't enable both gaps and titlebars simultaneously). This was done deliberately so that the two codebases could be easily kept in sync. They weren't necessarily opposed to introducing a gaps-like feature if an implementation was deemed acceptable.
Unfortunately this state persisted for years, and it turns out gaps is a popular feature, so they both eventually decided to bite the bullet, merge it, and then work on cleaning things up rather than waiting indefinitely for a unicorn implementation that was likely never going to appear.
- secure 4y agoThat’s right. We waited for a volunteer to help with the merge (as we both didn’t have enough time to spend on working on gaps), but nobody ever showed up. Eventually, because life circumstances permitted it, I was able to spend a few weeks, first getting gaps merged as-is (as discussed and communicated) and then even cleaned up, addressing all known limitations.
- Blikkentrekker 4y agoCynically speaking I'm somewhat scared of the way i3 is programmed that adding gaps would have to be hacky. My instincts tell me that if that be the case, the code probably isn't very clean and itself full of hacks.