search

laurent22 / joplin

Joplin - the privacy-focused note taking app with sync capabilities for Windows, macOS, Linux, Android and iOS.
https://joplinapp.org
Other
45.74k stars 4.97k forks source link

[Bug] Tray icon behavior and context menu adjustments #4514

Closed ParticleMon closed 2 years ago

ParticleMon commented 3 years ago

For the benefit of those who enable the "Show tray icon" option:

  1. Make left-clicking the tray icon show/hide the window instead of opening a context menu (with the options "Open Joplin" and "Quit"). This, in part, would remove a superfluous step required to show the window from the tray icon.

  2. Remove "Open Joplin" from the (right-click) context menu.

Also:

  1. Correct the wording of the option "Start application minimized in the tray icon" to "Start application minimized in the tray."

Joplin version: 1.7.11 Platform: Linux OS specifics: Mint 20.1

stale[bot] commented 3 years ago

Hey there, it looks like there has been no activity on this issue recently. Has the issue been fixed, or does it still require the community's attention? This issue may be closed if no further activity occurs. You may comment on the issue and I will leave it open. Thank you for your contributions.

ParticleMon commented 3 years ago

Bump.

stale[bot] commented 3 years ago

Hey there, it looks like there has been no activity on this issue recently. Has the issue been fixed, or does it still require the community's attention? This issue may be closed if no further activity occurs. You may comment on the issue and I will leave it open. Thank you for your contributions.

ParticleMon commented 3 years ago

Bump.

maxim-kukushkin commented 3 years ago

It seems like it was partially implemented at some point (left click opens/closes main window), while right click opens "Open / Quit" context menu. However, I see a strange behavior. I have 2 computers running exact same Linux (Arch Linux latest updates) with the same Desktop Environment (Plasma), same version of Joplin installed the same way.

I fail find any difference in settings or elsewhere between the two setups.

stale[bot] commented 3 years ago

Hey there, it looks like there has been no activity on this issue recently. Has the issue been fixed, or does it still require the community's attention? This issue may be closed if no further activity occurs. You may comment on the issue and I will leave it open. Thank you for your contributions.

maxim-kukushkin commented 3 years ago

The issue it still there. Please, don't close it

stale[bot] commented 3 years ago

Hey there, it looks like there has been no activity on this issue recently. Has the issue been fixed, or does it still require the community's attention? This issue may be closed if no further activity occurs. You may comment on the issue and I will leave it open. Thank you for your contributions.

maxim-kukushkin commented 3 years ago

bump

stale[bot] commented 3 years ago

Hey there, it looks like there has been no activity on this issue recently. Has the issue been fixed, or does it still require the community's attention? This issue may be closed if no further activity occurs. You may comment on the issue and I will leave it open. Thank you for your contributions.

maxim-kukushkin commented 3 years ago

Bump

maxim-kukushkin commented 3 years ago

What's the point of stale bot? If there's no reaction to the issue from developers it will not resolve itself. What's the point of auto-closing the requests?

ParticleMon commented 3 years ago

Indeed, what is the point of stale bot and auto-closing requests? Why implicitly promote cluttering up unresolved tickets with a potentially endless series of "Bumps"?

Why not simply leave tickets open?

maxim-kukushkin commented 3 years ago

Well, I would totally understand it if maintainers said "we won't implement/do this. If community wants, you can do it yourself" and kick off the stale bot. In this case yes, totally makes sense to close if no updates. However, I don't see how "ignore" == "stale"

maxim-kukushkin commented 3 years ago

Also, as I indicated the feature is there, but it's different on different machines, with no documentation available explaining why. So it looks more like a bug than a feature request.

ParticleMon commented 3 years ago

Of course there are nuances in handling tickets. But without a specified reason, which is still lacking here, it does seem justifiable to just close it.

For whatever reason, this was labeled a bug temporarily. So, whether it's an enhancement or a bug doesn't matter to me. That's the dev's prerogative. But if I need to change it or anything else, just let me know.

tomasz1986 commented 3 years ago

What's the point of stale bot? If there's no reaction to the issue from developers it will not resolve itself. What's the point of auto-closing the requests?

Yeah, calling an issue stale after a long time (e.g. 1+ years) is one thing, but just after 1 month? That is way too short. People have lives, jobs, families, and simply may not have time to work on an issue in such a short period.

As it is right now, if you want to keep the issue "alive", you need to constantly keep an eye on it (e.g. by enabling e-mail notifications), and then immediately after the bot has marked it as "stale", come back and bump it. Otherwise it will get closed shortly, and as such, basically forgotten.

Daeraxa commented 3 years ago

From what I understand GitHub is only for bugs and when a bug is reported with adequate replication steps, comments on impact/severity etc. it gets tagged by the maintainers with the various "sub" tags like desktop, high etc. The bug tag is initially added to the issue because that is what the issues section is for. If a maintainer removes the tag then it indicates that it is not considered to be a bug. Bug reports without any content (logs, replication steps etc.) often go ignored because of the extra work required to try and work out even if it is a problem. Enhancements, feature requests and individual issues are for the forums so therefore get mostly ignored here as this is simply the wrong place for it and stale bot is there to keep the list of actual issues (i.e. bugs) relevant.

maxim-kukushkin commented 3 years ago

Of course there are nuances in handling tickets. But without a specified reason, which is still lacking here, it does seem justifiable to just close it.

For whatever reason, this was labeled a bug temporarily. So, whether it's an enhancement or a bug doesn't matter to me. That's the dev's prerogative. But if I need to change it or anything else, just let me know.

See if you find the problem that I described relevant to you. I.e., it looks like in the latest version the behavior that you originally requested exists. But as I said it doesn't seem consistent across machines. So if you feel comfortable, the description can be changed to reflect this issue and the ticket can be changed to a Bug. It's fine if not, I believe I can raise a separate bug for it myself. In which case you can close or leave it for the stale bot to collect, I won't be "bumping" anymore (it seems like it doesn't work anyway - despite all the comments, the "stale" label is still there)

P.S. lol, the label was removed after this comment

stale[bot] commented 2 years ago

Hey there, it looks like there has been no activity on this issue recently. Has the issue been fixed, or does it still require the community's attention? This issue may be closed if no further activity occurs. You may comment on the issue and I will leave it open. Thank you for your contributions.

github-actions[bot] commented 2 years ago

Closing this issue after a prolonged period of inactivity. If this issue is still present in the latest release, feel free to create a new issue with up-to-date information.