https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=386178
--- Comment #5 from ocumo <kxk-ocumoatbugs...@lugosys.com> --- (In reply to Boudewijn Rempt from comment #4) > I don't mean the Ubuntu packagers, I mean the xcfe developers. > > I suspect that their window manager -- and I don't know which it is -- just > doesn't follow the spec correctly when it comes to popup widgets. Plasma's > kwin and Gnome's mutter seem to be fine. But I'm not an xfce user, I only > installed it to test the duplicate bug, and I couldn't reproduce it. > > But since it's not a bug in Krita itself it would be wrong to keep this bug > open; we could add a faq entry, but in the first place, the faq is pretty > long already, and in the second place, the issue is quite obscure -- and > finally, nobody ever seems to read the faq before reporting a bug, in my > experience. Thanks. I appreciate your comments and quick reply. I understand your point; still, I just think that "resolved" is not the correct status for this. It would seem that there was an issue and it was fixed, which is not true. Wouldn't it be more accurate something like "Won't fix"? I mean, that's what it is: an issue affecting Krita that its devs won't get into fixing it. If you were not able to reproduce it, you could say "can't reproduce", but not before actually testing on xfce on ubuntu -unless some other user would say "me too". If you, a Krita authority, qualify the issue as obscure: how do you think a Xfce dev will qualify it when he might not even have a clue of what Krita is, let alone reading a description of how to use it? My chances of getting this ever looked at are zero. If it is only me, then that's OK, only one guy with who know what strange constellation of variables that not even me would care about. But what if it's more people too? I have read that high profile users like David Revoy uses (or have used) Xfce, in his blog. I would be curious to know if it's only me. In any case, I do have difficulty in searching for information on googling for a legitimate issue in Krita and find that is has been "resolved", when it's not. It's not a matter of who to blame, it's a matter of document that there is an issue, fixable or not, that tells me that I better quit on using Krita in such context and choose instead another one. This strikes me as very uncomfortable, because when I write some JavaScript code that works in Firefox but it doesn't in e.g. Chrome, and I get a complaint from someone who uses Chrome, I cannot just go ahead and 'resolve' the complaint as a Chrome's problem. Why? Different browsers have different flavors of JavaScript. If I don't care about Chrome users, then I can say "sorry we don't support Chrome, please follow the instructions, you must use Firefox." Done. But if I do need to support Chrome users, I could never suggest 'hey, file a bug with Google to fix Chrome so that my code works in it'. It is me who have to ensure my code is compatible with whatever browsers I want to support, not the other way around. And those that I don't, I have to inform users about it: please don't run it on XYZ because it won't work! That's why browsers suck (not JavaScript). I can say here window managers suck too. Sorry for long post. I like so much Krita, I hope I can help somehow. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
