> Guys, you just don't seem to get that notify-osd is about unification
> and consistency amongst applications using it.

Totally wrong, we want to use it exactly for this reason: it's a common
(and nice) interface for showing messages from different applications.
But I can't see how this idea and goal should be (considered)
accomplished with fixed timeouts.

> It's fundamental design
> point is to NOT allow applications to use it in different ways, and also
> not to let the user configure it extensively.

Right, message priority and timings, not much freedom from the sender
standpoint. About the user: for example, he might just choose whether he
prefer to consider the timeout field from the applications or a fixed
timeout for every message (it is reasonable to have this as default
behaviour). I would not call it extensive configurability.

> In this light, what you
> request as a feature, could actually be regarded as a bug if it was
> implemented.

At the very beginning someone thought notify-send was ignoring the
timeout setting. Then it turned out to be a notify-osd issue. But it is
not possible to request it as a feature either, so what are you talking
about?

> As a user, you are free to use an alternative implementation of the
> D-Bus spec that suits your needs better.

We already discussed about Desktop Notification Specification.

> As a programmer, you have to deal with the behaviour of possible
> implementations on your target platform. You just cannot rely on
> specific timeouts, or specific behaviour.

It doesn't mean you cannot use the timeout field whenever possible, it
is there for a reason, and it is reasonable to consider it too, when
makes sense.

> If that's a problem to your usecase, you probably shouldn't be using the
> notification infrastructure for it in the first place.

Oh really? That's strange, because it fits perfectly my needs (even though I 
hate the timeout constrain).
BTW, I'm not a "luser", I'm a computer engineer (and developer as well), so I 
think I'm able to evaluate that by myself, thanks.

> That would be a
> design-bug in your own code, then.

Oh well, finally we discovered the problem: the others.

-- 
notify-send ignores the expire timeout parameter
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/390508
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.

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

Reply via email to