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 90134 - tasklist should also use "on top" to decide whether to minimize
tasklist should also use "on top" to decide whether to minimize
Status: RESOLVED OBSOLETE
Product: libwnck
Classification: Core
Component: tasklist
git master
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: future
Assigned To: libwnck maintainers
libwnck maintainers
: 144526 167866 321265 339371 346790 349368 351359 458667 476907 491436 568923 (view as bug list)
Depends on: 351055
Blocks: 155910
 
 
Reported: 2002-08-07 18:31 UTC by Havoc Pennington
Modified: 2018-01-24 13:15 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Havoc Pennington 2002-08-07 18:31:43 UTC
I'm not sure I'm convinced that this is the right thing to do, but a
suggestion here to consider: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=71001
Comment 1 Alex Cruise 2003-01-07 23:58:29 UTC
FYI, KDE does things the way I suggest.  In fact, KDE will only
minimize a window when you click on its taskbar button if the window
is BOTH topmost AND has the keyboard focus.  If either of these
conditions does not hold, KDE simply raises AND focuses the window
whose taskbar button you've clicked.
Comment 2 Calum Benson 2003-03-12 17:14:18 UTC
All sounds vaguely sensible to me, although I don't use focus follows
mouse so what do I know :)
Comment 3 Elijah Newren 2004-03-08 18:37:13 UTC
I use focus-follows-mouse except when testing bugs and patches for
Metacity/libwnck.  :-)  I think Alex's suggestion sounds perfectly
reasonable.  However, Havoc's summary doesn't match Alex's suggestion
so I'm going to change the summary (to reflect that toplevel window
should not replace active window as the method to determine whether to
minimize; it should use BOTH criteria).  Here's my line of thinking:

We want the behavior of clicking on windows in the tasklist to be "If
the window is 'not activated' then 'activate' it, otherwise minimize
it".  'activated' in this context is a little unfortunate in that
there are window manager hints and function names using that word that
don't necessarily mean the same thing.  But I couldn't think of a
better word.  Anyway, libwnck currently interprets 'activated' as
'focused', whereas 'focused AND raised' perhaps makes more sense.  (Of
course, for click-to-focus, there's no difference between these
interpretations since focused implies raised in that context)

My first guess at implementing this would be to have libwnck treat
both non-focused windows and obscured windows as 'not activated'.  The
reason I say obscured instead of not-top-level is that I wouldn't want
a window which is unobscured but considered to be "below" another
(which I think can happen if the two windows have no overlapping
region) to be raised instead of minimized.  However, this could cause
problems  in cases of windows that are always on top (such as the
panel).  So, if I understand correctly, implementing this would mean
determining whether the current window is obscured by any windows "at
the same level" (meaning that always-on-top windows such as the panel
shouldn't count as obscuring a window).

Does that make sense?  Anyone want to provide guidance as to whether
my implementation strategy makes sense and perhaps give some pointers
on how to do that?  :)
Comment 4 Elijah Newren 2004-10-19 22:51:14 UTC
*** Bug 144526 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 5 Elijah Newren 2004-10-20 16:07:33 UTC
note to self: wnck_screen_get_windows_stacked() may help here...
Comment 6 Salman Khilji 2004-10-26 20:17:01 UTC
I'm glad that the discussion on this subject finally got going.  When will this
bug be fixed.  I need to have it fixed yesterday!
Comment 7 Elijah Newren 2004-10-26 20:31:49 UTC
If you're in a hurry, then please fix it yourself and submit a patch for us to
merge.  Otherwise, you'll have to wait until we get around to it.  I'd like to
do this before Gnome 2.10, but I have a lot of other higher priority things.
Comment 8 Seth Nickell 2004-10-27 18:26:28 UTC
The proposed behavior seems sensible. However, usability wise we're trying to
ween the desktop off of focus follows mouse anyway, so I would say this should
be rather low priority.
Comment 9 Michael P. Soulier 2005-01-12 00:17:25 UTC
> However, usability wise we're trying to ween the desktop off of focus follows 
> mouse anyway, so I would say this should be rather low priority.

I fail to see how weaning users off of a valid preference, especially those of
us who've been using Unix for years, is a good thing. Please don't penalize us
for our preferences. 
Comment 10 Elijah Newren 2005-01-12 03:53:31 UTC
Michael: From both an ease-of-learning and consistency perspective, sloppy and
mouse focus have some tradeoffs that make them suboptimal (see
doc/how-to-get-focus-right.txt in the metacity source code for more details) and
thus understandably reduce their desirability for usability folk.  Seth's
comments are spot on as far as guidance for priorities for the usability team
(and the team was cc'ed after all, in addition to the keyword being added).

That being said, I'm a die-hard focus-follows-mouse user as well, and I intend
to continue to fix activation bugs for all focus modes in metacity, libwnck, and
related modules.  A truism in open source is that you can increase the priority
of something by providing patches...which I intend to do.  ;-)
Comment 11 Vincent Noel 2005-01-28 14:38:58 UTC
Moving to the right component. Sorry for the spam.
Comment 12 Vincent Untz 2005-08-18 15:45:59 UTC
*** Bug 167866 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 13 Elijah Newren 2005-12-15 07:06:02 UTC
*** Bug 321265 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 14 Sergej Kotliar 2006-07-31 01:39:39 UTC
*** Bug 349368 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 15 Elijah Newren 2006-08-12 16:35:19 UTC
*** Bug 339371 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 16 Elijah Newren 2006-08-12 16:42:50 UTC
It's worth noting that Stephen Cook has a partial patch in bug 339371; it'll fail in certain cases, but should work in quite a few of them.  I've asked him to attach any further patches here.  Also, bug 351055 will need to be fixed before this one can be.
Comment 17 Vincent Untz 2006-08-15 15:19:03 UTC
*** Bug 351359 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 18 Elijah Newren 2006-09-28 00:46:20 UTC
*** Bug 346790 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 19 Elijah Newren 2007-07-20 15:45:14 UTC
*** Bug 458667 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 20 Vincent Untz 2007-09-14 14:20:33 UTC
*** Bug 476907 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 21 Alex Cruise 2008-03-31 22:39:40 UTC
(In reply to comment #9)
> Please don't penalize us for our preferences. 

Welcome to GNOME.  Apparently you're new here! ;)

But seriously, folks, this STILL bothers me, more than five years later.  I have neither the time nor the inclination to try to spelunk my way around the GNOME source tree and fix it myself, especially when KDE works just fine.
Comment 22 Elijah Newren 2008-04-05 16:52:41 UTC
(In reply to comment #21)
> (In reply to comment #9)
> > Please don't penalize us for our preferences. 
> 
> Welcome to GNOME.  Apparently you're new here! ;)

Funny...but not accurate.  I myself also use mouse focus and get hit by this bug on occasion and I'm one of the maintainers.  I simply haven't had time to fix this issue; there are simply too many issues.  I'm once again attempting to dig myself out of my inbox pile...
Comment 23 Elijah Newren 2009-02-01 14:06:01 UTC
*** Bug 568923 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 24 Vincent Untz 2010-01-14 02:19:07 UTC
*** Bug 491436 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 25 Alex Cruise 2011-07-07 00:58:39 UTC
Maybe I should throw a party for the 9-year anniversary of this bug in a month... :)
Comment 26 Jonathan Kamens 2011-07-07 04:40:41 UTC
I think the "dock" GNOME 3 shell extension handles this the right way. So maybe we can call it fixed in GNOME 3?
Comment 27 GNOME Infrastructure Team 2018-01-24 13:15:24 UTC
-- GitLab Migration Automatic Message --

This bug has been migrated to GNOME's GitLab instance and has been closed from further activity.

You can subscribe and participate further through the new bug through this link to our GitLab instance: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/libwnck/issues/12.