Created attachment 166229 [details] [review]
[altTab] Remove Alt+W/A/S/D hack

or we could just remove the wasd stuff. It was never meant for real use.

(In reply to comment #1)
> Created an attachment (id=166229) [details] [review]
> [altTab] Remove Alt+W/A/S/D hack
> 
> or we could just remove the wasd stuff. It was never meant for real use.

Please don't at least not for a reason like that; it might not be the primary "interface" but I prefer them over the arrow keys (or the mouse) because they are way easier to reach (near alt-tab) and having them there doesn't really hurt.

given how alt+tab works in shell (app, not window) it gets tricky to get somewhere with alt+tab only (like in regular metacity), I would keep the wasd bindings, once you find them out they are much better than looking for the far-right arrow keys or moving the mouse.

plus, they are harmless imho.

(In reply to comment #2)
> and having them there doesn't really hurt.

If the interface is too inconvenient to use without the undocumented hacks, then it needs to be fixed. If having the undocumented hacks there causes people to not complain about the inconvenience of the "real" interface, then the hack is hurting all the ordinary users who don't know the hack is there and have to use the non-hack interface.

(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > and having them there doesn't really hurt.
> 
> If the interface is too inconvenient to use without the undocumented hacks,
> then it needs to be fixed. If having the undocumented hacks there causes people
> to not complain about the inconvenience of the "real" interface, then the hack
> is hurting all the ordinary users who don't know the hack is there and have to
> use the non-hack interface.

But removing it does not really fix anything; we have one interface that is inconvenient to use and one that works well so we remove the later?

If anything the former should be removed; the drawback would be discoverbility but I don't think of anyway to fix it without changing the physical layout of the keyboards.

(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > and having them there doesn't really hurt.
> 
> without the undocumented hacks,

So lets just document it ...

What is vim style movement?

(In reply to comment #7)
> What is vim style movement?

h - left
j - down
k - up
l - right

It's hardly more intuitive than awsd, unless you use vi (oops, I've just outed myself)

(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > and having them there doesn't really hurt.
> 
> If the interface is too inconvenient to use without the undocumented hacks,
> then it needs to be fixed. If having the undocumented hacks there causes people
> to not complain about the inconvenience of the "real" interface, then the hack
> is hurting all the ordinary users who don't know the hack is there and have to
> use the non-hack interface.

Ok you got me there. I agree to remove wasd too then and fixing the issues with alt+tab.

My case: trying to alt+tab to a terminal or pidgin window requires extra hand on keyboard or mouse.

if wasd is kept, it should be able to work on non-US keyboard (it doesn't ATM).  VIM keynav has the pro to work on also on non-US keyboard (ie azerty) and it also used in gmail / google reader / big pictures for navigation.

Review of attachment 166229 [details] [review]:

Looks good (apparently Intel has a "secret" internal branch of Xephyr that works with dri2, but maybe it also gets the keysyms right...)

(In reply to comment #11)
> Review of attachment 166229 [details] [review]:
> 
> Looks good (apparently Intel has a "secret" internal branch of Xephyr that
> works with dri2, but maybe it also gets the keysyms right...)

Don't take away my pony :/

belatedly pushed

*** Bug 677135 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***