On 12 January 2011 15:39, Maximilian Odendahl wrote:
>
>> Here's the change that triggered this...
>>
>> Do you think we should just revert this bit, without it we get the
>> original scroll behaviour again.
>
>
> but probably break some parts of the new accessibility stuff. Let's see what
> od fi
Here's the change that triggered this...
Do you think we should just revert this bit, without it we get the
original scroll behaviour again.
but probably break some parts of the new accessibility stuff. Let's see
what od finds out.
-Max
___
Libr
On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 14:01 +0100, Maximilian Odendahl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > max, do you remember the code in the postits that the attached patch
> > affects, can you remember what the problem was that needed fixing ?
>
> no, I don't remember why this is needed, but I don't think this is the
> ri
Hi,
> max, do you remember the code in the postits that the attached patch
> affects, can you remember what the problem was that needed fixing ?
no, I don't remember why this is needed, but I don't think this is the
right patch for two reasons:
- it is a regression from 3.2.1, where no change
On Sat, 2011-01-08 at 23:50 +, Andy Hearn wrote:
> The cursor, when on a post-it note, now can go out of view when Joe
> User scrolls, and is correctly brought back into 'focus' if the user
> types something.
>
> But however, this patch shouldn't be pushed at all - I suspect that
> the hack whi
Was that just a long festive hiatus.?! :-)
The cursor, when on a post-it note, now can go out of view when Joe User
scrolls, and is correctly brought back into 'focus' if the user types
something.
But however, this patch shouldn't be pushed at all - I suspect that the hack
which I've just re
