Il 07/07/2010 23:20, Sebastien Bacher ha scritto: > Could you take those discussions somewhere else as requested before?
Where? > You > disagree on the design choices there and don't see the value in having a > system working on a consistent way No, and I'm not the only one. You seem quite sure that the ubuntu team is always right and the (l)users are always wrong and, being stupid, can't comprehend the great design behind notify-osd. At the moment I've never read a word explaining what "consistent way" means and what it is useful for. Where is the "value"? In what? Where is the value when lots of people complain about it? Instead, I already explained why it is much more reasonable, useful and natural to let the client chose the right (yes, the right) timeout. The DNS suggests the same. > but it's the choice Ubuntu did for > its notification system, you are free to use other softwares to replace > this one or other system if you decide this one doesn't fit your needs, Sure, but we are talking about notify-osd. > arguing over and over using the same arguments will not bring any > addition value to the discussion Are you referring at your own messages? Well, this time I agree with you. -- 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
