After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 305499 - DEMANDS_ATTENTION insufficiently implemented
DEMANDS_ATTENTION insufficiently implemented
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 120439
Product: libwnck
Classification: Core
Component: general
2.10.x
Other All
: High major
: ---
Assigned To: libwnck maintainers
libwnck maintainers
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2005-05-26 00:44 UTC by Luke Schierer
Modified: 2005-05-26 15:53 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Luke Schierer 2005-05-26 00:44:52 UTC
Please describe the problem:
Right now DEMANDS_ATTENTION is set fairly automatically (as I understand things)
for gtk applications where the window is created but not focused.  however,
setting it does not sufficiently distinguish the window from others such that
users realize that it has been created.  Because of this, windows get lost

Steps to reproduce:
Use gaim compiled against a new version of gtk on a new version of gnome. watch
as gaim windows pop under.  note how easy it is to miss that a new window has
been created

Actual results:
if you pay close attention as a normal user, you will see the new window.  this
will also be true if it happens to be created on a sparsely populated desktop,
such that it can be seen underneath the focused window.  however, it is very
easy to *not* notice that the window has been created

Expected results:
the window should flash in the task bar, or something similar, to draw the
user's attention to its existance more strongly

Does this happen every time?
yes

Other information:
reference http://mail.gnome.org/archives/wm-spec-list/2005-May/msg00007.html and
its replies
Comment 1 sean.egan 2005-05-26 02:57:24 UTC
I personally use GNOME without a "Window List" applet, so I have absolutely no
way of knowing when new Gaim windows are created. Typically I wind up closing a
maximized web browser window and discover tons of Gaim window beneath.

-s.
Comment 2 Elijah Newren 2005-05-26 05:51:49 UTC
I think we're probably going to have to make this a tracker bug; seems to make
sense to me at least.

Ray Strode and Havoc have been working on blinking in the taskbar, with patches
in bug 120439.  The patch is intentionally somewhat hacky, because Owen is
surprisingly "not completely sold that a gtk_button_flash() is a useful thing"
(gtk bug 150594).

Bug 120439 also covers Urgency, which appears to be important to support for
gaim (see the thread Luke referenced).  In particular, windows which already
existed before an IM was sent but which are at the bottom of the stack of
windows need to be able to grab the attention of the user when an IM is sent. 
(Note that we possibly could, as the WM, set the DEMANDS_ATTENTION hint for such
windows by detecting stacking configure requests
(meta_window_configure_request())--if we do so, it may also make sense to raise
such windows to just below the window with focus and move it so that is obscured
as little as possible by the focus window)

Rob has also mentioned the possibility of handling demands-attention via a
notification applet or message of some kind.

Finally, another possibility, once we have transparency/translucency, is to
place the window on top but make it highly transparent so that the user can
ignore it temporarily and continue with what they were doing but definitely
notice the window wants attention.  (This last idea could possibly also be
merged with Rob's idea, if Rob's idea is done as a separate window rather than
an applet)

For now, let's get the flashing working (even if hackily), but keep this open
for other improvements...
Comment 3 Havoc Pennington 2005-05-26 15:08:41 UTC
I would say this is mostly a dup of 120439. I don't think we need to keep it
open for "all possible improvements" unless someone is actively coding those
improvements.
Comment 4 Luke Schierer 2005-05-26 15:18:56 UTC
*shrugs* fair enough, if its duplicate, they can be merged, or whatever
approximation of that bugzilla allows. Elijah said in the thread I started on
wm-spec to open a bug, so I did. 
Comment 5 Elijah Newren 2005-05-26 15:53:19 UTC
Well, I had an idea in mind about something metacity itself could do to assist
here as well (but when I started typing up my comment I realized I had made a
mistake and the configure_request stuff seemed to be the closest); and I thought
that Luke might file additional independent examples of things we were
missing--in which case it would belong in a separate bug.

I figured it couldn't hurt to have a separate bug just in case and then file as
a duplicate if it turned out to be such.  *shrug*  Sorry if I wasted anyone's
time.  I'll mark as a dup for now.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 120439 ***