Bob Warren wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------------
As a result of Richard's recommendation on the UR-List, here I am!
(fanfare of trumpets)
Welcome aboard.
...
Here is a little feedback already about Metacard 2.6.6's behaviour under
Ubuntu Breezy:
----------------------
In Windows, some windows can be minimized and others cannot. For
example, I can minimize my stack window. In this case, it is reduced to
an icon at the bottom of my screen in the task bar. To get it back
again, I click on the icon at the bottom, and the stack re-appears in
the middle of my screen. On the other hand, I cannot minimize the coding
editor of a button script I am creating. There is no minimize button at
the top of the code editor's window, only a close button. This makes
sense to some degree, because closing the code editor is one way of
actioning the coding I have typed, though why I should not be able to
minimize it, I don't know.
In Ubuntu, regarding the coding editor, what appears at the top of the
window is just the opposite of what appears in Windows: I have a
minimize and restore button (which also means that I cannot even drag
the window itself to a new position). It also means that the coding I
have typed can never be actioned, unless I go to the "File" menu and
choose "Apply Script". However, although the script is applied, this
does not close the window, and so far I have not discovered how to close
it. Very soon, the number of code editors I have open at the same time
becomes rather unwieldly.
Window decorations are a function of the engine. On Mac OS and Windows
the minimize button is active, so I'm fairly confident this isn't an IDE
issue, but an engine one.
If you make any other stack and set its style to modeless, do you get
the same result?
I have already discovered that this is not the only aspect of window
behaviour that needs attention in the Metacard IDE under Ubuntu Breezy.
-----------------------
Above, I have described a single difficulty which indicates that I
cannot easily use Metacard under Ubuntu at all at the moment. In order
to get such things fixed, where is the most appropriate place for
reporting difficulties? Here on the List? If the Metacard equivalent of
Bugzilla does not exist, but somebody decides to invent one, I would ask
but 2 things:
1. That the bug reporting/enhancement request interface should be more
user friendly than Bugzilla.
Agreed. The bug count is low, so we generally just use this list. It's
a fairly low traffic list, and these days used almost exclusively for
design and enhancement of the IDE (most general language discussion has
long since migrated to the use-rev list). Posting bugs here not only
alerts the team member who'll work on it (often me, with help from
Klaus, Ken and others), but also alerts other users to these issues.
2. That it should not include a voting system aimed at evaluating the
importance of bugs etc. in the opinion of other users. To me, such a
system has various fundamental problems, and the importance of bugs or
suggested features should be firmly in the hands of those responsible
for the IDE/engine.
Agreed. Voting is helpful for a company to measure the impact of an
issue on its community, but I'm sure not even RunRev gives it more
weight than many other important factors (cost of fixing it, cost of not
fixing it, etc.).
But with the MC IDE the goal is zero known defects with each final
release, so voting isn't necessary since every bug gets effectively
infinite votes. :)
--
Richard Gaskin
Managing Editor, revJournal
_______________________________________________________
Rev tips, tutorials and more: http://www.revJournal.com
_______________________________________________
metacard mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard
