Background: I love this Patch for "Patchmanager for SailfishOS" and have used it since its original release in Warehouse (as "Force large covers" back then), until I found out that it was "Force cover size", which prevents applying "Ultimate statusbar patch" by Ancelad. Hence, as one is forced to make a choice between them, it is clear that most will choose the far more crucial functionality of "Ultimate statusbar patch" (at least this is what I did).
Sorry, I originally missed the link to this github repo, thus I reported this issue on Openrepos.net, first. The brief summary of this comment (without the erratic detours I took) is:
The Patch "Force cover size" conflicts (when applying in Patchmanager) with "Ultimate statusbar patch" (and vice versa). I wonder, if this is really necessary, as they are supposed to patch quite different areas of the SFOS UI (the statusbar vs. the application switcher).
After reading the description of this Patch thoroughly, I suspect the "some other tweaks" (of which two tweak the statusbar) actually do not "improve the experience in this particular case" ( ;\ ), when trying to use "Ultimate statusbar patch". Apparently the feature "The status bar background is more prominent, easing its readability" of "Force cover size" conflicts with "Ultimate lockscreen patch" (have not investigated that technically), so the easiest approach may be just to remove this feature, as it is not related to the primary aim of "Force cover size" (in contrast to all other features it provides): To enable enforcing the cover sizes (to be always "small" or "large") and improve the usability of the application switcher, when many applications are open.
But whichever technical approach you may choose, bottom line of this issue is: @g7, please make "Force cover size" compatible to "Ultimate statusbar patch", so one can use them together.
Background: I love this Patch for "Patchmanager for SailfishOS" and have used it since its original release in Warehouse (as "Force large covers" back then), until I found out that it was "Force cover size", which prevents applying "Ultimate statusbar patch" by Ancelad. Hence, as one is forced to make a choice between them, it is clear that most will choose the far more crucial functionality of "Ultimate statusbar patch" (at least this is what I did).
Sorry, I originally missed the link to this github repo, thus I reported this issue on Openrepos.net, first. The brief summary of this comment (without the erratic detours I took) is:
The Patch "Force cover size" conflicts (when applying in Patchmanager) with "Ultimate statusbar patch" (and vice versa). I wonder, if this is really necessary, as they are supposed to patch quite different areas of the SFOS UI (the statusbar vs. the application switcher). After reading the description of this Patch thoroughly, I suspect the "some other tweaks" (of which two tweak the statusbar) actually do not "improve the experience in this particular case" ( ;\ ), when trying to use "Ultimate statusbar patch". Apparently the feature "The status bar background is more prominent, easing its readability" of "Force cover size" conflicts with "Ultimate lockscreen patch" (have not investigated that technically), so the easiest approach may be just to remove this feature, as it is not related to the primary aim of "Force cover size" (in contrast to all other features it provides): To enable enforcing the cover sizes (to be always "small" or "large") and improve the usability of the application switcher, when many applications are open.
But whichever technical approach you may choose, bottom line of this issue is: @g7, please make "Force cover size" compatible to "Ultimate statusbar patch", so one can use them together.