[Pidgin] #4986: automatic chat input field resizing should be optional, regression from 2.3

[Pidgin]

#4986: automatic chat input field resizing should be optional, regression from 2.3
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
  Reporter:  swbrown       |       Owner:                   
      Type:  enhancement   |      Status:  reopened         
  Priority:  minor         |   Milestone:                   
 Component:  pidgin (gtk)  |     Version:  2.4.0            
Resolution:                |    Keywords:  chat input resize
   Pending:  0             |  
---------------------------+------------------------------------------------
Comment (by TacBoy):

 Replying to [comment:183 deryni]:
 > Replying to [comment:176 TacBoy]:
 > I am amazed (and insulted) at your assertion that the amount of time the
 developers in general (and myself in particular) have spent in attempting
 to respond to the comments in this ticket, the duplicate tickets on this
 topic, the handful of discussions in the #pidgin IRC channel, and the
 (smaller) handful of discussions on the devel mailing list can *possibly*
 be seen as an indication of the fact that we aren't "paying attention".
 Does your definition of "paying attention" involve nothing beyond
 immediate capitulation to ill-formed and ill-defended requests?

 No, it means answering legitimate questions and concerns with reasons as
 opposed to out-of-hand denials with no reason given. If they have been
 given they have clearly not been misunderstood. It was not intended to be
 insulting, but truthful. I'll let you decide if the truth is insulting.
 However, I suspect instead that since you believe these things are
 "complaints for complainings sake" that you will instead decide that
 people saying they don't understand why as an attack rather than what it
 is... a truth. They don't make these things up.

 > Do you really not see a difference between my taking the time to respond
 to as many possible posts here as I can and not responding to any posts
 here? Because if you don't (and this would explain why people seem not to
 read and understand my comments) I'll stop and save myself the time.

 I see a number of responses. The majority of which you seem to spend your
 time refuting what people say and then saying "why won't you give me
 ideas" when they have. What they have not given you is ideas you seem to
 like. But again, no solid reasons as to why or why it was even put in
 place in the first place. Again, perhas an iterration of that would help.

 > As to your comment about my numbers, you apparently failed to notice
 that I was intentionally being ludicrous *exactly* to indicate that any
 such discussions are insane and of essentially zero use.

 Try clear communication instead of sarcastic allegory next time. It may
 communicate your idea more effectively seeing as how everyone that
 responded missed your point.

 > I did this specifically because I was responding to more than one
 comment which made the (indefensible) claim that the number of users
 commenting here is indicative of an overwhelming majority of users who
 believe likewise.

 Funny, I agree with that, yet I communicated it clearly. (I believe)

 > The fact that you (and other people) seem to be unable to understand (or
 accept) the arguments I (and others) have put forward more than once to
 explain why in fact we made the change we did and what benefits we think
 it has had for everyone (including the people that don't like) as well as
 the reasons we made the change this way rather than simply adding a
 boolean all-or-nothing option is *exactly* the problem that most confuses
 me. I have attempted to be clear on both of those points numerous times
 and have had seemingly zero ability to actually get anyone to read and
 understand my comments.

 I suggest that you consider that if nobody seems to understand your
 comments perhaps it is not the people that are the problem.

 > As I have said to others before, if you feel your time is best served by
 swithing to funpidgin by all means feel free to do so. I hope it serves
 you well and that the people behind it have the time to keep up with our
 releases, for their sake (I wouldn't want to be there when they fail and
 all of you who moved across realize they aren't infallible either).

 I hold no illusion that they are infallible. I also hold no illusion that
 you can please all the users or that the way that I want it is the best or
 only way or that devs will listen objectively at all times. All I can do
 as a user is go with the option that best fits my need at the time. My
 sincere hope is that this main branch would be that. This is why I propose
 keeping it as it is with a half height growth with an adjustable default.
 I really don't understand what the downside of this is.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://developer.pidgin.im/ticket/4986#comment:189>
Pidgin <http://pidgin.im>
Pidgin