Bug 489131 - Option to only show tasks that demand attention when their virtual desktop is active
Summary: Option to only show tasks that demand attention when their virtual desktop is...
Status: RESOLVED INTENTIONAL
Alias: None
Product: plasmashell
Classification: Plasma
Component: Task Manager and Icons-Only Task Manager widgets (show other bugs)
Version: master
Platform: Arch Linux Linux
: NOR wishlist
Target Milestone: 1.0
Assignee: Plasma Bugs List
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2024-06-24 18:28 UTC by jf0918
Modified: 2024-06-28 20:58 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In:
Sentry Crash Report:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description jf0918 2024-06-24 18:28:51 UTC
Tasks that demand attention (highlighted in orange) show up in the task manager, even if those tasks are on a different virtual desktop. I have my tasks separated by virtual desktop (only tasks of the current virtual desktop are shown in the bar), but if a task of another virtual desktop demands attention, it shows up in the task manager of every virtual desktop. An option to disable this behavior could be helpful. This option would only display that task in the task manager, if it's virtual desktop would be the active one, even if that task demanded attention.
Comment 1 cwo 2024-06-24 18:52:55 UTC
One thing to keep in mind here is that if a user action results in a new tab or dialog opening in an existing window on another workspace, this option would give absolutely no feedback to the user, it would appear like a broken system/program.

This regularly happens with for example Firefox windows when you click a link in a different program (Firefox likes to open things in the last window that was used), or with the confirmation dialog in KeepassXC when the browser extension requests a password from the database.

I could see a lot of bug reports coming if this consequence is not made clear to the user, or ideally if it could be worked around.
Comment 2 Nate Graham 2024-06-25 15:28:09 UTC
I agree with cwo, yeah. I think this is something we have to say no to, sorry. It might be a benefit for specialized and niche use cases, but it would break more general ones for people who used the setting.
Comment 3 jf0918 2024-06-28 20:58:09 UTC
Unfortunately I don't know too much of the technical aspects to help out here. Thanks for considering it regardless!