[sugar] frame gets in the way when alt-tabbing

[Erik Garrison]

On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 12:59:52AM -0400, Mikus Grinbergs wrote:
> 760.  Running (on my XO) a ported Linux application which puts up 
> multiple screens.  As far as I could tell. I was able to access all 
> of those screens by using the alt-tab procedure.  But while doing 
> this the Frame was unacceptably intrusive.  For instance, I could 
> not see the titles on the top line, which identified each screen.
> 
> If I rapidly pressed alt-tab and released -- the XO would not bother 
> to switch screens.  If I slowly pressed alt, then tab - the XO would 
> bring up the Frame.  I would need to release and press tab another 
> time to get the XO to switch to the next screen (while still showing 
> the Frame).  I would need to release alt to get the XO to stop 
> overlaying the screen edges with the Frame.  [And it seemed to me 
> that sometimes the Frame would not go away even then - I would have 
> to press and release the Frame key to ensure that it was gone for good.]
> 
> --------
> 
> One of the first things I did upon getting my G1G1 was to go into 
> one of the .py files and __NOOP__ the "autoraising" of the Frame. 
> That gave me Sugar screen behavior that was under *my* control.
> 
> Now, Sugar has again started to interfere with what I am doing --
> by raising the Frame when I alt-tab.  I HATE THAT!  I HATE THAT!
> I thought the idea was to have the human in control of the computer, 
> instead of the computer dictating what the human may see.
> 
> I would like the Frame function in the Control Panel to allow me to 
> optionally disable the automatic showing of the Frame upon alt-tab. 
>   [Let *me* decide when I want to see the Frame !]
> 
> In the meantime, I guess I will have to go back to modifying the .py 
> files in Sugar - to reclaim Sugar screen behavior that does not 
> interfere with my use of the computer.
> 

I think the idea is to use the frame to show you which windows you can
alt+tab between, such as is done in Gnome or other WMs.  This is, in my
opinion, quite useful.  However, I am unsure of the utility of clumsily
animating the transition of the frame into view, or the lack of
configurability of this option.

So perhaps the best thing to do is to add a configuration option to
allow the user to enable or disable this behavior?

Would it be better if the frame was quickly displayed instead of sliding
into view?  Maybe generally we need a configuration option to turn on
and off fancy animations to improve system responsiveness?

Erik