The future of virtual desktops

[Aaron J. Seigo]

On Friday, February 25, 2011, Hans Chen wrote:
>    - I see virtual desktops (VDs) as subordinate to activities

this is incorrect. disabuse yourself of this notion.

>, i.e., each activity should have its own set of virtual desktops. Currently
>VDs are not activity aware.

i don't particularly see the benefit of this. it is in theory possible (kwin 
is already aware of activities), but unless there is significant benefit to 
such a thing, it will be very complex to add to the configuration GUI.

>    - There is an option to kind of merge activities and virtual desktops

no, there isn't.

>    ("Different widgets for each desktop"). I know that it was added due to
>    popular demand, but now that activities also manage windows I don't
> think it is needed anymore. (Some users are not going to like this, I
> know.)

yes, like the people we implemented that feature for in the first place: 
people who want different wallpapers and widgets on each desktop.

virtual desktops and activities are actually, not just in theory but actually, 
orthogonal. we know this from usage patterns of real live users.

-- 
Aaron J. Seigo
humru othro a kohnu se
GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA  EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43

KDE core developer sponsored by Qt Development Frameworks
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/plasma-devel/attachments/20110303/4157aa31/attachment.sig