SUMMARY The new tiling feature is amazing! It'd be nice if we can use 2 zones simultaneously if we want a window to use both zones. STEPS TO REPRODUCE 1. Drag a window to the middle of 2 zones 2. 3. OBSERVED RESULT it only asks me to select top or bottom row. EXPECTED RESULT Window will use both zones SOFTWARE/OS VERSIONS Operating System: Kubuntu 22.10 KDE Plasma Version: 5.26.90 KDE Frameworks Version: 5.102.0 Qt Version: 5.15.6 Kernel Version: 5.19.0-29-generic (64-bit) Graphics Platform: X11 Processors: 24 × AMD Ryzen 9 5900X 12-Core Processor Memory: 62.7 GiB of RAM Graphics Processor: AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT Manufacturer: Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. Product Name: X570S AORUS MASTER System Version: -CF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Similar system to mimic is Microsoft's Power Toys' tiling.
*** Bug 468373 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Came here to request the same feature. Glad it's already here. +1
You can already do this if you add a third zone that uses all vertical space. Then when moving the window, you can point more or less to the middle and see the placement. See for example, my layout from ~/.config/kwinrc, which uses this feature both vertically and horizontally: ``` tiles={"layoutDirection":"horizontal","tiles":[{"layoutDirection":"floating","tiles":[{"height":0.48,"width":0.5,"x":0,"y":0},{"height":0.48,"wi dth":0.5,"x":0,"y":0.52},{"height":1,"width":0.5,"x":0,"y":0},{"height":0.48,"width":0.62,"x":0,"y":0},{"height":0.48,"width":0.62,"x":0,"y":0.5 2},{"height":1,"width":0.62,"x":0,"y":0},{"height":0.48,"width":0.5,"x":0.5,"y":0},{"height":0.48,"width":0.5,"x":0.5,"y":0.52},{"height":1,"wid th":0.5,"x":0.5,"y":0},{"height":0.48,"width":0.38,"x":0.62,"y":0},{"height":0.48,"width":0.38,"x":0.62,"y":0.52},{"height":1,"width":0.38,"x":0 .62,"y":0}],"width":1}]} ```
Is there a reason not to simply edit the layout to make those two zones into one larger zone?
Kind of the opposite of Bug 483759. IMO neither really make sense as they propose violating the semantics of how custom tiling works. In both cases you should just modify the tile layout to accommodate what you want. I think the underlying issue is that modifying the layout feels slow. Bug 466057 proposes addressing that, and if implemented, I think it would be usable for the use cases you have in mind here.
(In reply to Nate Graham from comment #4) > Is there a reason not to simply edit the layout to make those two zones into > one larger zone? Sorry for the late reply, was this question for me?
Yes, but then I answered my own question. :)
(In reply to Nate Graham from comment #5) > Kind of the opposite of Bug 483759. IMO neither really make sense as they > propose violating the semantics of how custom tiling works. In both cases > you should just modify the tile layout to accommodate what you want. > > I think the underlying issue is that modifying the layout feels slow. Bug > 466057 proposes addressing that, and if implemented, I think it would be > usable for the use cases you have in mind here. The problem is that, sometimes, we don't need another layout just for a window to be larger in one of the sections occasionally.
This ticket fell in the pile of emails Sorry I never responded
(In reply to Nate Graham from comment #7) > Yes, but then I answered my own question. :) Really sorry for missing the reply!!! My issue for editing the config file directly, is because the editor is really hard to use, in terms that I like similar values, like 62% vs 38% width, which is almost impossible to get to the right pixel in the editor. Also, what I am trying to do, is a zone (lets say left area), that if I drag it into the middle, it uses full height, if I drag it to the top it only uses top half of that zone (left zone), and if I drag it to the bottom, only uses bottom zone. Similar to normal tiling, where it can use 50% width and 100% height/50% height top/50% height bottom. In the editor this is almost impossible to do, since dragging the zones correctly by 1px is a chore, and even if possible, the editor has an issue that making the a zone below another, the one below is inaccessible. Hope that is clear, I am having difficulties trying to put it into words :)