[PATCH]: menu button in window deco

[Thomas Zander]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Saturday 20 July 2002 21:03, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> On Saturday 20 July 2002 08:20, Cristian Tibirna wrote:
> > I tend to agree with your analysis. The biggest problem is that the
> > "double click == close" behavior is traditional and ubiquous. E.g., CDE
> > exhibits it too, IIRC.
>
> many bugs are "traditional and ubiquitious" ;-) we should still fix them.
>
> > I wonder how many bug reports we would get if the double click
> > behavior is deactivated.
>
> this is a good question. it's an obvous usability abomination.

Why do you think that?  Its a feature, just like double clicking a word 
selects that word, and triple clicking selects line.  Its not invasive for 
users that don't use it and quite usable for people that do.  It is annoying 
some times that you hit the triple click while you only wanted the double 
click.

> but how many
> people rely on that behaviour? if it isn't a significant number of people,
> i'd like to see this misfeature removed.

Misfeature or not, the people that do rely on that behavior will not like it 
at all if you remove it.  Its quite easy to gain a bad name in the UI 
department, and rather hard to get rid of it. In this case it really is the 
safest path to follow the former leaders. (i.e. ALL of them :)

> if lots of people do use it, then
> i suppose it should stay.

Is there any problem with it staying? Do you get bug reports that people lost 
work because of this? Is the bug really this behavior, or did an application 
forget to ask to saved unsaved work?

> > On another hand, I am strongly opposed to differentiating kwin styles
> > with importantly different behaviors. I.e., either drop double click
> > everywhere, or nowhere. But I might behave in dynosaurus here...

I agree that all should behave the same!

> ok. if decided, i'll remove it everywhere.

I think you read CTs email the way you wanted to, since I do believe he only 
pointed out the problems with the removal of this feature. So concluding that 
the feature should be removed seems a bit hasty :)

Please don't remove the feature, it only makes it harder for recovering 
Windows users :)

- -- 
Thomas Zander                                           zander at planescape.com
                                                 We are what we pretend to be
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE9OsyCCojCW6H2z/QRAptsAKCxmih5tkytKDgs747ntsKgFyjTEwCgoyJW
u0Km1roVD41sXXSja6O/+0M=
=yraf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----