[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-panel-devel
Subject:    Re: setPassivePopup(true) for Battery applet?
From:       Jamboarder <jamboarder () yahoo ! com>
Date:       2009-01-02 23:36:42
Message-ID: 598884.20375.qm () web37308 ! mail ! mud ! yahoo ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

> From: Aaron J. Seigo <aseigo@kde.org>
> On Wednesday 31 December 2008, Jamboarder wrote:
> > Would there be any objection to using
> setPassivePopup(true) for the battery
> > applet.
> 
> yes, and for the same reason that making kicker a passive
> popup would be 
> inane: they aren't items that you open and then do
> other work with them still 
> open for reference.

Thanks.  I wasn't sure if there was a reason for the difference, so that's why I asked instead \
of just committing the change.

> 
> 
> the one pixel gap sounds like an inconsistency that needs
> to be tracked down 
> and fixed. addressing a bug by throwing some random other
> option at it that 
> just happens to do what we want isn't a good way of
> dealing with things ;)

Agreed that the one pixel bug needs to be fixed and the question was not intended to skirt \
around that need.  I just wasn't sure if the absence of a setPassivePopup(true) in the Battery \
applet was intentional or not, thus the reason for the question.  I understand now that it was \
intentional, thanks.

Regarding the visual bug when setPassivePopup(true) is not used, the difference seemed to be \
just one window flag: Qt::X11BypassWindowManagerHint

I confess my understanding is too limited to figure out why this causes the problem.

Thanks much,
Andrew (Jamboarder) Lake 
_______________________________________________
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]