@All
The problem I have with this whole decision is that a real question was raised 
in the whole discussion and then it was ignored:

1) When the window of a program/application is already focused and you
click the corresponding launcher icon (of that program) you expect
usually that something happens

2) The current behaviour is: nothing happens

3) "nothing" is really  not very much (forgive me the irony)

4) The patch submitted by Marc is really interesting because it sees to
the fact that there should never be a button (or menu option, or link,
or check-box...) which does not show any reaction when a user clicks on
it

5) If the path is not accepted this bug report still cannot/must not  be
set to won't fix. The reason for this is simple: you still have a user
who expects a reaction when he clicks on the icon. If there is a
situation where this expectation if not fulfilled (ergo "nothing"
happens) then there is still an error present.

6) This is perhaps not the original bug report. But still the question
was raised during the discussion of this report.

7) I would at least expect another proposal.
For instance, if the window is already focused and somebody clicks still on the 
icon you can have an effect that makes the window glow for a second so that one 
sees that the launcher icon indeed does not serve in hiding/minimizing the 
windows but instead focuses them. In case of an environment where the whole 
desktop is cluttered by different small windows this would even help in showing 
which window is active in the moment (though this would be a side effect, for I 
usually expect a user to know which window he/she is currently using).  

@Michael
Concerning the idea that somebody has to maintain a patch: 
I know that. There are two possibilites
1) Canonical closes launchpad for the public and makes it a system where people 
can only post the bugs they found. And in the best case even that should not be 
possible and instead all bug requests should be filed via apport. So they won't 
get any patches by users which they would have to maintain. And on the other 
hand no user will be disappointed that he/she invested much time in fixing a 
bug and still the work he/she put in it won't be appreciated.
(Certainly the possibility to reject a patch because of lacking quality should 
be considered. This would indeed be a reason to reject a patch.)
The solution to send the bug reports via apport (and only apport) is ideal 
because thus a users will not have the possibility to request changes which 
belong to a wishlist and therefore Canonical is spared from any discussion 
about their design decisions. Normal users which have a own opinion will still 
rage and rave about some of these design decisions because one sometimes gets 
the idea that decisions were made without much thinking and discussion, but as 
there are many good design decisions made as well, this should not be a problem 
because many people will be content with what they get. 

2) You (meaning Canonical) accept the fact that people post requests in
which they demand changes to the system. But Canonical should then make
clear that they do not want any extra work from non-canonical members
because they are not willing to maintain patches from users. So do not
post any messages on planet.ubuntu or anywhere to get people to fix
bugs, as I deem this  insolent. Canonical cannot request users to work
for free on those bugs  they deem worthy to be worked on but completely
ignore those bugs in which they are not interested.

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/733349

Title:
  Minimize Application's Windows upon clicking it's Launcher Icon

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ayatana-design/+bug/733349/+subscriptions

-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to