Wrong product, did you fingers slip? Moving from gtk-engines to GIMP.

About your question:

Not really, cause the other bug (Bug #304036) is there as well under the same product. I think I have opened it as a GIMP issue, but Comment#1 clearly points out a GTK+-issue. 

So, to merge them and have it on the same product would be fine, cause I guess it refers to the same/similar issue. But this is out of my scope.

BTW: Where should the *missing* details about the request be specified. I do not mind to discuss and specify it in this bug nor in the other. You say, I'll do ;)

There is no such concept as a GIMP main screen and I don't see how we should implement your request.  As Tor already explained, in order to open a window on a specific screen, we would have to tell the Windows desktop where exactly the window should be opened.  GIMP is not a window manager.  It doesn't know where a window would best be opened. Thus I don't see how we should add code that does this.  Perhaps you should file an enhancement request for your operating system to improve support for multi-head setups.  Closing as WONTFIX.

But now the whole issue is getting ridiculious.

On Bug #304036 it is told me, I shall open a new enhancement request - which I have done in this Bug. After not even evaluating and discussing what a solution might be useful you close this Bug with the same reason as given in (Bug #304036). 

Is this a process about creating on Bug after another? Who is quicker in opening a new one and the immediately closing it?

Sorry, I am little bit pissed off about the handling of Bugs as it is done here. You wanna fool me, or what is the reason 'you should file an enhancement request for your operating system to improve ...' And after I have done it like you posted, then the guy comes there and starts fooling me again and again???

Well, Tor asked you to open an enhancement request against GIMP because he doesn't see any way to implement the requested feature in the toolkit.  I told you that I don't see any sane way to implement the requested feature in the application.  So we are basically throwing the ball to the desktop; in our opinion, this needs to be implemented in the window manager. So you should ask the vendor of your desktop to improve it according to your wishes.  If you disagree and think that the requested behaviour can be implemented in GTK+ or GIMP, you are free to change the source to your needs. If you do so, please consider to send us the patch, perhaps we can include it.

Let me add that if you could simply pinpoint one specific thing at a time that you want changed, chances would be much larger that somebody would implement what you suggest. For instance, if you think GIMP's File Open dialog's position should be remembered by GIMP (in case the user moves it around), and the next File Open dialog open at the same location (position on a certain monitor), please say so.

Feel free to be pissed off, maybe you should ask for your money back and do business with somebody else instead? I am sure Adobe or Corel for instance listen much more responsively to customer requests for enhancement. You probably will get responses directly from their developers, too, don't you think?

to sven: 
a) This the  enhancement request you are talking? So, why immediately closing?
b) I can hardly believe you cannot query the current monitor and you cannot query as well the position of this monitor-layout. since java provides these methods, independent from system, so why not in GIMP? So, where is the problem to position a window manually via code?

to tor: e.g. Eclipse project has a lot of opened bugs, some I've reported there as well. but NOBODY ever did such a ticket-handling, i.e. A says 'do this', then I do this; B says, 'no, no just the other way around.' so, there is little bit more *user-friendly* handling FROM the developers.

to sven + tor: since these bugs are lying around for more then one year of inactivity, does it make any kind of sense to discuss it further? I mean discussing on hard facts, about requirements instead of 'vague' personal objections? 

If yes, then please point clearly to the Bug where is makes sense.
If not, then I am very interesting in what kind of relevance has comment #8 in Bug #304036? Only to create work?

Sure, it is trivial to query the current monitor (if by "current" you mean where the mouse pointer is, for instance), and its size. What isn't trivial is to decide where to put a new window on the monitor. That's what we want you to specify.

If Eclipse is more user friendly, good for them and their users. They also have a lot more corporate backing, and presumably more active developers.

> since these bugs are lying around for more then one year of
> inactivity, does it make any kind of sense to discuss it further?

Well, this only shows how few people actually work on GIMP, and how vague your initial report was. And then when finally somebody takes a closer look at the bug report, the least we would expect is that the bug reporter is interested in providing more of the information we ask for. Remember, it's we who have been asking you for hard facts and specific suggestions.

Reports of specific bugs that really are serious (i.e. cause the software to work incorrectly in the sense of corrupting data, etc) are often handled quite swiftly. See for instance bug #344496.

> what kind of relevance has comment #8 in Bug #304036? Only to create work?

Create work for you? Sure, why not? Would that be so bad, that you would at least specify exactly what you want, if you expect other people to do volunteer work for you?

That comment also contains an example (the IRC log extract) of a person who likes the current behaviour of GIMP on Windows. (I remind you again that the current behaviour is not something the code explicitly asks for, but just how Windows happens to work.)

(with "more active developers", I mean "a larger number of active developers", of course)

I still do not bother about specify it more. But on which Bug? I mean I have now several Bugs to the same issue. And if I take the current experience from this bug, then I feel uncomfortabel posting in this Bug anything further (=already closed as 'Won't fixed').

'Create work for you? Sure, why not? Would that be so bad, that you would at
least specify exactly what you want...?' Because 
'There is no such concept as ... and I don't see how we should implement your request .... Closing as WONTFIX'

i.e. 

- before going into details already verfied it is impossible to do so.
- and probaly the specific details wouldn't be read instead closed immediately.

=> Again, where to post details and in which Bug#? (I am unwilling to open any new Bugs, cause they will be closed immediately or the wrong component, or whatever reason something is missing.)

If you want this to change, you are free to change the code yourself. Since there are not enough active developers interested in implementing your request, the bug has been closed as WONTFIX so that it does not distract us from more important things.

Note that you should have a lot less problems with window positioning in the development version. Most windows are marked as transient there and for transient windows, the monitor the window shows up should be clearly specified as the one that the parent window lives in.