13

The idea here is that the pager would receive an option to automatically manage the number of desktops during a session.

It would essentially always keep one empty desktop at all times. It would determine that a desktop is empty by whether or not it has windows. Windows set to show on all desktops would not be included in the tally (infinite desktops!).

It would start removing desktops when 2 or more are empty. To avoid destroying any organization the user has, it would remove the youngest desktops without windows first.

There would also be an option to 'lock' or 'pin' permanent desktops in place, if you want to keep them for any reason. Locked desktops would not be included in the tally of empty desktops.

If this was done, an option to make the pager 'auto hide' when there is only one desktop might be an idea, too.

"It would essentially always keep one empty desktop at all times."

Why would we want this - a desktop that you could never actually use, making it a wasted resource.

Snowhog wrote:"It would essentially always keep one empty desktop at all times."

Why would we want this - a desktop that you could never actually use, making it a wasted resource.

The reason for one empty desktop is for one desktop to be the one you would populate. Once you start using the 'empty' desktop, it would add another new desktop.

So if I'm using 2 desktops, one I'm using for GIMP and a bunch of things, another has my browser; There is one empty desktop, so I have 3 desktops total.

I open Amarok, and I put it in the empty desktop. The pager will notice all my desktops are being used, and adds another desktop on the end. Without thinking about it or adjusting any settings, I've kept my desktops organized.


The only downfall, is that, yes, there is always one unused desktop. At the same time though, I'm not choosing to have 4 desktops and wasting resources when I'm not using them, nor am I limiting myself to just one or two. I could always fiddle with the settings, but that gets annoying - fast, especially when I would have to break my workflow.

So instead of choosing too many desktop 'in case', or too few desktops, this option would be the 'not 100% effecient, but highly flexible' option.

This wouldn't work since it is only possible to remove the last virtual desktop.

TheBlackCat wrote:This wouldn't work since it is only possible to remove the last virtual desktop.

And it is not possible to make such possible? I would imagine that it shouldn't be terribly difficult to implement this feature if the virtual desktop manager were well-designed.

I suppose if it is only possible to remove the last virtual desktop, that would be sufficient to satisfy the requirements, because if you have two empty desktops in the middle, removing one of them might disrupt one's spatial memory (especially if using more than one row of desktops).

I like the idea of ensuring that there is always one empty desktop - that way you can always find an empty desktop if you want to do something with the plasmoids that are on the desktop.

Just curious, isn't this how GNOME Shell will work? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaQURsCnSjg&t=1m

At first I was negative to the idea, but after giving it some thought I must say that I like it. I like the fact that you always have an empty desktop - I usually find it easier to switch virtual desktop when I want to access the desktop.

This would also work well with the activities concept - activities being a more "static" context switcher and virtual desktops a dynamical way to organize your windows. However, in order for this to work, activities must be able to have independent numbers of virtual desktops. From my understanding this is hard to achieve with the current implementation of virtual desktop, but who knows?

The only objection I have is that this shouldn't be an option, if implemented this should be the way it works.

Hans wrote:
... However, in order for this to work, activities must be able to have independent numbers of virtual desktops. From my understanding this is hard to achieve with the current implementation of virtual desktop, but who knows?

My understanding was that this was the direction things were heading anyway - virtual desktops are subordinate to activities, and different activities require different number of windows therefore different amount of space therefore different number of virtual desktops.

TheBlackCat wrote:This wouldn't work since it is only possible to remove the last virtual desktop.

Would it be possible to have it simply move the windows from one desktop left until the empty desktop is on the right? If this was done instantly, it would still give the illusion of shifting desktops.

So it would go...
1. Shift windows left X desktops so the empty desktop is on the right.
2. Switch the current desktop so it appears as though the windows weren't shifted.
3. Rename any applicable desktops.
4. Remove the far-right desktop.
5. Profit.

This is not my call, I am just passing along the decision by the kwin developers. However, I expect your solution is not as easy as you think. For one thing, it may trigger desktop effects. It would probably also require repainting a lot of screen space, which could be very costly (especially if blur is enabled). It also may not even fit in with how kwin is currently structured.