trash-cli VS i3

There's a Freedesktop specification for trashing files that you may consider adhering to: https://specifications.freedesktop.org/trash-spec/trashspec-...

I get that writing a small utility is fun, but if it is just that (for fun), I suggest you put that into the readme. Otherwise, why should I choose your tool over something like https://github.com/andreafrancia/trash-cli, which seems to already be distributed for the major distros? Does your implementation scratch an itch that the myriad of other implementations don't? I'm just curious.

Hard deleting was more necessary on the past when storage was so tiny and expensive, but now we not constantly fighting for space anymore. So treat a rm (and the Unix tradition as a whole) as a product of its time, move undesirable files to the trash instead, you can use this trash-cli for linux.

Not related to Docker, but use the trash-cli trash command to have the recycle bin in the terminal as well.

i ended up using shell-safe-rm plus trash-cli and my own wrapper script around rm that verifies some rules like for example the argument don't start with '/' , if i want to delete for example /home/shin/.local/somefile then the script will not let me and suggest to cd to /home/me/.local and delete from there , same if i do rm /var/somedir.

They're probably talking about something like this rather than a GUI file manager

It's a bad idea to alias rm. You will get trouble on a machine that has no alias. Use trash-cli instead. It's much safer than rm. BTW, don't alias trash as rm because they are different.

For Linux there's [trash-cli](https://github.com/andreafrancia/trash-cli/). Doesn't seem to work for MacOS per this issue (https://github.com/andreafrancia/trash-cli/issues/284), but it suggests to use https://hasseg.org/trash/

Use trash-cli for all your rm -rf needs!

There are a number of foss tools that work with the freedesktop trashcan concept on Linuxes/BSDs, like https://github.com/andreafrancia/trash-cli. Bunch of desktop envs' programs also use this, so it's nearer to OS-wide standardized behavior.

While I believe Memory Saver was a great improvement, it only works if the tab is hidden or the window minimized. I recently learned the required state is not triggered if the tab is open but on another virtual desktop. At least this is the case with many of not all Linux window managers. Some of the many discussion threads on the topic:

https://github.com/i3/i3/issues/4353

> This is very true, and unfortunately there are very few people working on linux accessibility (including not me! I am part of the problem!).

Accessibility work itself ironically suffers from an accessibility problem. I brought up i3wm above, the issue for that is pretty illuminating: https://github.com/i3/i3/issues/3393

It's not that the devs are saying "this doesn't matter", the devs behind one of the most popular tiling window managers in the X11 ecosystem are saying, "this does matter, but we don't know how to fix it. We don't know what changes we'd need to make to get Orca working."

It's a really fundamental breakdown that's kind of a tragedy because I honestly believe that if accessibility communities were more heavily baked into testing and development in Linux and if this wasn't treated like two separate worlds, it would be better for everyone -- fixing accessibility concerns very often improves interfaces across the board and makes them more powerful.

But... how do you bridge that gap? I don't really know, I tried looking into Orca to see what would need to happen here and bounced off of it pretty hard, it's not a very approachable tech stack and there aren't tutorials or getting started guides. And on the other side of the issue I can preach about needing accessibility input during interface design, but I'm not in a position to give specific advice because I don't use screenreaders or alternate control schemes and I don't know what the biggest problems are.

The people who need to be involved in that process can't get involved because there's a tech barrier in place even for technically inclined people, and because the underlying software locks them out from the start. i3wm isn't ever going to get someone who's intimately familiar with Orca to jump into the conversation because the people who need to use Orca can't use i3wm. So that leaves the people who can address that tech barrier, but they don't know what to do or how to approach the problem because of the lack of involvement and because the communities are isolated from each other. So it's a chicken-and-egg problem and I don't know how to solve it.

This is partially why i use tools like i3 (/ sway). i like the tool; it works extremely well for me; the design has stayed the same for 20 years; there's no profit motive to come along and fuck everything up. it just works. it is boring in the best way possible.

I use MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch, Mid-2014) with Manjaro as OS using i3 as a window manager. It isn't perfect, but I'm thrilled with it. I have been a Mac OS user for the last 15 years and wouldn't change what I have now for a Mac OS because I don't need more than what I'm using for development.

Even though, we have moved the official i3 support channel to GitHub discussions, i3's biggest community is still on reddit and if things continue like that there is going to be a lot of helpful content on an increasingly closed platform.

for example, take i3. https://github.com/i3/i3/issues/4478

For daily usage I really like kubuntu with i3wm, but it takes some configuration and getting used to the shortcuts, but it's well worth it