15 Jan
2012
15 Jan
'12
11:55 p.m.
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 15:13:51 -0800 (PST)
Darrell Anderson <humanreadable(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
You are saying that Centered suits your
already non-default way
applications open, not the other defaults. Making Centered the default
policy, with no maximised-by-default application, would be terrible.
That is the real configuration that matters, because it's the one which
would be put as default if Tim listened you. Not your personal one.
Nevertheless
we offer the possibility to change the sane
defaults to something
else for advanced users like yourself so that you can use
e.g. a centered
placement strategy.
"Sane" according to whom? What might seem "sane" to you is not
always
"sane" to others.
I quite agree. That's why centered is *not* a
useful
placement strategy. It
requires users to move their windows to have it useable.
This is the worst
thing which could happen.
Not really. I have used Centered for years. Here is a difference: I
configure most apps to open maximized. Those few that I open in
non-maximized mode typically get opened for a few moments and then
closed. So for me, Centered is useful. Furthermore I have the complete confidence of our
bug
tracking software. We
have millions of users reporting hundred of bug reports
each year to multiple
parts of our window manager. But reports to the placement
strategy? Feature
requests? Hardly any. I am involved in multiple KDE related
support areas
watching for window manager related topics: nothing about
placement.
When people have an option to change a default they do just that.
There is no "bug" to report.
sorry, what a bullsh*** I cannot tell you how
arrogant I
find this statement.
It's this complete utter non-sense I have seen here more
than once on this
list and elsewhere with the opinion that KDE developers are
all assholes not
caring about their users. It's such a stupid thing to think
that KDE
developers pretend to "know better". Such nonsense makes me
really angry and I
really have to think about whether I want to continue to
offer my help to the
Trinity project.
Where did I write "KDE developers"? I wrote "developers." That you
jumped to this conclusion is interesting.
Regarding your help with the Trinity project, please point me to
anything that you have contributed. Not to KDE3 but to Trinity.
*sigh* Ego is never a reason why something is the
default.
Really? Never?
And yes if you
write that you consider ego as a reason for defaults, I
consider this as an
insult (I have not been involved when the default for this
option has been
set) and are convinced that you consider KDE developers to
be stupid as you
quite nicely highlighted with various side notes in your
mail.
Where did I call KDE developers stupid? Which side notes? I have
disagreed with some of their decisions, but I ask you to show me
where I called the people stupid.
I would appreciate if you could use a
constructive manner
to discuss and I
think you should appoligize towards the KDE developers you
insulted in your
mail, e.g. the quite nice Kate developers who I know
personally.
Please show me the insults I made to KDE developers.
Darrell
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
trinity-devel-unsubscribe(a)lists.pearsoncomputing.net For additional
commands, e-mail: trinity-devel-help(a)lists.pearsoncomputing.net Read
list messsages on the Web archive:
http://trinity-devel.pearsoncomputing.net/ Please remember not to
top-post:
http://trinity.pearsoncomputing.net/mailing_lists/#top-posting