GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 503143
Vertical maximize broken (resizes past panels)
Last modified: 2007-12-12 00:17:05 UTC
Please describe the problem: In metacity v1:2.20.1-1 (debian testing/lenny), vertical resize is broken, in that the windows are always resized to be a bit taller than they should. The upper limit/panel is done fine, but the lower border of the window is put under the lower panel (or as close as possible for example in gnome-terminal where height_inc is a line). Steps to reproduce: 1. Assign a key to vertical maximize 2. Vertically maximize a window, for example gnome-terminal or a nautilus window Actual results: The lower border is under the lower panel. You can't see or reach the lowest line (terminal) or the bottom scrollbar (other windows) Expected results: I know this respeced panels in metacity/gnome 2.16 Does this happen every time? yes Other information: See also bug #358674, unidirectional maximization is not available: Vertical maximize has very large usability pros, and I would like it to be user-visible in the window menu. Many of my applications have window content that naturally benefit from using all available vertical space, while it is convenient to keep windows partly visible in the horizontal direction. Think of working with two pieces of paper next to each other. Examples of use cases for vertical maximize: shell applications (vim, irssi, normal shell), RSS and mail readers, some web browsers; whenever applications wrap the text to the full window width, it is beneficial to use all vertical space but limit the text column width. Pidgin and other text chats is another example, as is the gtk file selector.
This is probably overrated, and could instead be related to the order of events as the desktop is initialized or something like that. Toggling some panel settings in gconf made metacity suddenly recognize the lower panel. This bug report should be viewed as a love declaration for vertical maximize; but also some rationale for the use cases, as well as showing that there are actual users even if the feature is hidden. Let it loose! :)
I think this is a dupe, isn't it? *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 468075 ***