Suggestion- Notifications that remain during the event

tkn · Post by **tkn** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 6:55 am

There are times when I don't want a sticky notification, nor do I want a timed one, I just want a notification to last as long as the underlying status exists.

For example, if my friend signs into Adium, I might like to know she is signed in for the duration of her being signed in, with the notification disappearing once she has signed out, not after a specific time.

Will Growl be able to do this?

Post by **bgannin** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 8:57 am

You are exactly describing a sticky notification - one that stays on screen until you dismiss it. Beyond this there's not going to be further support, it's a notification system, not a dashboard.

Post by **evands** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 5:44 pm

Well not exactly describing a sticky notification; the description is a sticky notification which is dismissed by the notifying application.

yelly · Post by **yelly** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 6:09 pm

Having the application dismissing a sticky may not actually be such a bad idea, it could play very well with coalescing.

Post by **evands** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 6:12 pm

yelly wrote:coalescing.

...which someone appears to have removed from Growl 1.1 $:\$

yelly · Post by **yelly** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 6:14 pm

evands wrote:
yelly wrote:coalescing.
...which someone appears to have removed from Growl 1.1 $:\$

What!?!?!?!?!?!?
Coalescing rocks, bring it back!!! (please?)

Post by **The_Tick** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 6:29 pm

We're not going to ship 1.1 without coalescing.

Post by **bgannin** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 9:17 pm

evands wrote:
yelly wrote:coalescing.
...which someone appears to have removed from Growl 1.1 $:\$

It's very much sad pandas that someone yoinked it without an implementation replacement, but that's what happens in piecemeal refactoring on the trunk.

It would have been restored already had most (if not all) of the architecture that supported the prior implementation not been changed. As it stands I'm currently reviewing how the (new) 1.1 architecture is set up to be able to rewrite it.

Post by **bgannin** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 9:19 pm

evands wrote:Well not exactly describing a sticky notification; the description is a sticky notification which is dismissed by the notifying application.

Should an application really have that level of control back to Growl though? It's meant to receive the information and optionally pass back a click. Beyond that it takes the control away from the user (despite the request herein for it), and providing a mechanism to do so can open Pandora's box.

Post by **evands** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 9:21 pm

bgannin wrote:
evands wrote:Well not exactly describing a sticky notification; the description is a sticky notification which is dismissed by the notifying application.
Should an application really have that level of control back to Growl though? It's meant to receive the information and optionally pass back a click. Beyond that it takes the control away from the user (despite the request herein for it), and providing a mechanism to do so can open Pandora's box.

I wasn't saying the application should have that level of control; just clarifying how the user's request differed from a sticky notification, since you wrote:

bgannin wrote: You are exactly describing a sticky notification

Post by **bgannin** » Sat Mar 31, 2007 9:38 pm

Better clarity for all.

And now I've framed a better answer to the OP.