Bug 707184

Summary:	Place plugin "smart" mode not so smart
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Bojan Smojver <bojan>
Component:	compiz	Assignee:	Adel Gadllah <adel.gadllah>
Status:	CLOSED UPSTREAM	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	15	CC:	adel.gadllah, awilliam, leigh123linux
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2011-05-24 14:58:41 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:

Description Bojan Smojver 2011-05-24 10:40:57 UTC

Description of problem:
In this mode, unlike Metacity, the plugin doesn't even try to place the windows "nicely" on the screen. Instead, it just aligns them to the top left. Metacity, on the other hand, calculates how many windows would fit onto the screen vertically and horizontally and then places windows so that when they take maximum amount of screen space, they are still pleasantly separated from the edges of the screen.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
compiz-plugins-main-0.9.4-1.fc15.x86_64

How reproducible:
Always.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Start Gnome session with Compiz.
2. Install ccsm and enable place plugin, smart placement.
3. Open multiple Gnome terminals on one workspace.
  
Actual results:
Windows not placed smartly.

Expected results:
Windows are supposed to be placed smartly.

Additional info:
This is how compiz worked in F-14, but this was somehow broken in F-15.

Comment 1 Adam Williamson 2011-05-24 14:58:41 UTC

can you file this upstream? It's almost certainly nothing to do with the Fedora packages, we don't touch the plugin code.



-- 
Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers

Comment 2 Bojan Smojver 2011-05-24 22:24:30 UTC

http://bugs.opencompositing.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1343

Comment 3 Bojan Smojver 2011-05-25 01:32:59 UTC

Actually, this is part of compiz core.

Comment 4 leigh scott 2011-05-25 08:06:34 UTC

(In reply to comment #3)
> Actually, this is part of compiz core.

Would you mind not resetting the assignee, Adam owns this package.

Comment 5 Bojan Smojver 2011-05-25 08:18:20 UTC

(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > Actually, this is part of compiz core.
> 
> Would you mind not resetting the assignee, Adam owns this package.

Completely unintentional. Just wanted to make sure this is assigned to the package that actually has a problem, which is compiz itself:

$ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/compiz/libplace.so 
compiz-0.9.4-2.fc15.x86_64

Comment 6 leigh scott 2011-05-25 08:34:24 UTC

(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
> > (In reply to comment #3)
> > > Actually, this is part of compiz core.
> > 
> > Would you mind not resetting the assignee, Adam owns this package.
> 
> Completely unintentional. Just wanted to make sure this is assigned to the
> package that actually has a problem, which is compiz itself:
> 
> $ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/compiz/libplace.so 
> compiz-0.9.4-2.fc15.x86_64

Sorry I didn't notice that you also changed package as well.

Comment 7 leigh scott 2011-05-25 08:46:02 UTC

(In reply to comment #1)
> can you file this upstream? It's almost certainly nothing to do with the Fedora
> packages, we don't touch the plugin code.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers

I think upstream might have fixed it in compiz-0.9.5

http://gitweb.compiz.org/?p=compiz/core;a=commitdiff;h=ddaf0d1937be49ea613111eed03a806b9261ce65

Comment 8 Bojan Smojver 2011-05-25 08:51:41 UTC

(In reply to comment #7)

> I think upstream might have fixed it in compiz-0.9.5
> 
> http://gitweb.compiz.org/?p=compiz/core;a=commitdiff;h=ddaf0d1937be49ea613111eed03a806b9261ce65

I love testing new builds :-)