Screaming into the void, I guess, but PSA. Don't use buttons for links. In my case, I couldn't right-click and copy the URL, but there are a lot of other reasons not to do this.
I personally suggest web devs to install axe devtools [0] in their dev browser profile. Also, LLMs have gotten to the point that even the small local models can help a lot [1].
[0]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/axe-devtools/
[1]: Gemma 4: https://pastebin.com/Mjm1Vx4C
There's an argument that links are "portals" that take you somewhere, while buttons cause some action to happen, Whether you treat a file as a resource (which your browser just chooses to save on disk instead of rendering on screen), or whether you treat it as an explicit "download" action, is a matter of semantics I guess.
but traditionally, references to files are links, and it is up to the browser what to do with them (whether to just download them or to download and then display them). that's what all links are. that's the whole point of hypertext. every link causes the browser to make a request to a server and fetch something. buttons are for activating things, not for downloading.
I do that roughly every 60-90 seconds with tmux - so, until the zellij developers relent (they suggest the "proper way" of copy paste is to pipe the data into a text editor and use that - but has the downside of not supporting system copy-paste buffers.) - no options other than to stick with tmux (or fork zellij - but that seems a bit much....)
The general response is that this user behavior, selecting/copying/saving-in-named-buffer is a very "tmux" like usage pattern the Zellij authors don't want to encourage in Zellij. Instead -they suggesting bringing your preferred Text Editor (emacs, vim, etc...) and doing the select / copy /paste in that.
The problems for me are - (A) I know how to select/copy/paste very well in tmux. Don't have the faintest clue how it's done in a text editor, (B) No (easy) ability to have multiple named buffers if you use a text editor, etc...
I summarized them here: https://github.com/zellij-org/zellij/issues/947#issuecomment...
But I guess Zellij people don't use the keyboard so much for copy pasting. A lot of people just use the mouse.
Zellij is close to 50 megabytes, but tmux and all dependent libraries (minus libc, it's always there) is about 2 megabytes.
That's a Rust thing. It's what happens when you statically link because you monomorphise everything.
When I first started learning Rust, my "hello wold" binary was HUGE.
I use tmux to reattach to programs after the network connection dies, and not really anything else. I would welcome a version of it that stripped out everything but that, and just replayed the last few pages of scrollback on reattach.
Like `dtach`?
Mac WM is horrible, I use aerospace to make it tolerable
Sadly, these issues are low priority for the main dev. Instead they are focusing on things like serving terminal sessions over the web, which is useless to me if I can't use Neovim in it.
I like tmux, but I no longer spend time customizing it for every server I run it on, only to be tripped up on some new server I haven't set-up yet.
Then, if you're like me and read this years ago, play around with the Light Mode dropdown which was new to me. :)
It's this year's April Fools' joke: https://xkcd.com/3227/ :P
Didn't seem worth it, considering the giant footprint in comparison to tmux.
upfront breaking the basic expectation of having a clickable link is enough for me to know that this piece of software is badly designed and is not worth my time.
I am a monthly donor, I think it has the right balance of community plus the lead dev has a vision, opinionated but open to inputs, and focused.
First thing I did was customize all the input commands and configuration with LLM assistance. Smooth as butter.
The only issues I've had with it is that sometimes it's hot keys conflict with vim, but you can easily turn it temporarily off with ctrl+ g.
If you're already used to tmux I'm not sure you would benefit much from changing, but it definitely has a better out of the box with pane hints, names, and more user friendly hot keys.
:term to open a terminal in a new vim window (or :vert term)
Standard window movements apply (by default the window prefix is Ctrl-W), most important are: Ctrl-W,{hjkl} to switch between windows, Ctrl-W,{<>+-} to resize windows, Ctrl-W,{HJKL} to move windows to edges, Ctrl-W,{qc} to (force) close windows
Enter normal mode of a terminal buffer with Ctrl-W,N: now you can perform vim motions and scroll the output
Enter insert mode with i and you can type into the terminal again
In insert mode: Ctrl-W "x to paste register x, Ctrl-W . to send a literal Ctrl-W. If too annoying, you can change the window prefix of vim
This goes for vim, neovim also has a terminal mode but it works differently I think
I see everyone complaining about this but as a new tmux user as of a few months ago, I had an LLM assist me with configuring it how I wished and it did a bang-up job. Stuff like using “-“ to split horizontal and “|” to split vertical so you don’t even have to remember it…
i want tmux for three things:
1. easy splits
2. easy scrollback
3. being able to restart a session if my terminal dies
given all that, tmux works exactly as expected.
what are all these "significantly better ui and overall ux"?
For them, there's as much variety of desires as for any other window manager, and there are tons of those. But terminal ones are usually significantly easier to configure in wild ways due to having fewer (but more powerful) knobs to tweak, so a fair number choose just one and configure the heck out of it.
I know I'd get used to them, but the key combos used by tmux seem very odd choices, even to someone who used to code on a real glass tty!
Also, can’t really stand the name.
I tried zellij a couple of years ago when it first got popular and it didn't click for me.
has some starting links, if screencasts do it for you
For me the only glitch was some key binding collision with ghostty/aerospace but it works perfectly out of the box on alacritty for me