Look Neil, one person called it "the most viewed IntelliJ issue", you called it "essential to *whom*?!", very well, but it is just few lines of easy code, practically zero maintenance.
This behaviour is intentional. I am sorry you hate it but there are users who love it. There is no plan to change it. Essential to *whom*?! Doesn't look like that many users were that bothered! Do you see any similarities? Can you show me one case of such an attitude of IntelliJ devs towards their users? And why it matters? Because one day, I may find some other behavior in Netbeans which me (and a lot of others) find troublesome, and which can be corrected with few lines of easy code and an option hidden in some registry, practically zero maintenance. But we we may just be told to go away, because "I am sorry, go away". Why should I risk it? Le mar. 16 oct. 2018 à 14:01, Neil C Smith <neilcsm...@apache.org> a écrit : > On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 at 12:05, Tom Arilla <tmaril...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thank you for the information, but the thread started because of an > essential bug ignored for many years > > Essential to *whom*?! Doesn't look like that many users were that > bothered! > > > By the way, didn't you make a whole database of open bugs obsolete, with > no migration attempts? > > Actually, that's not true. There was a conscious decision not to > migrate everything in it. But the old bug tracker is still there, and > in the last web chat we discussed maintaining a read-only clone of it > on Apache infrastructure. Which I hope will happen, although it > remains to be seen if the content in it flags any concerns for Oracle. > > Best wishes, > > Neil >
