> 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
