A few, quick comments:
> Show Sidebar: [t][f]
> - Shows the sidebar or hides it.
There's more about this, like what widget should be displayed in the
sidebar.
> Icon size: {large, medium, small}
> - This should probably translate into different sizes for the different
> views. Maybe have the actual pixel sizes hidden in a config file
> eg:
> iconview_size_large=128
> listview_size_large=32
> iconview_size_large=64
> ...
> This should keep the "powerusers" who want to actually control their icon
> sizes precisely happy while keeping configuration simple.
I'm more in favour of using dedicated icon sizes (from the
implementations POV). And adjusting icon sizes doesn't seem to be
necessary IMHO. It sounds more like a hack to work-around badly choosen
defaults. I'd say
details/treeview - 22px
iconview (vertical/horizontal) - 48px
thumbsview - 128px
is pretty ok for everyone.
Of course, we *can* make that an option as well. Indeed we can make
pretty much everything an option, but that would violate the concept of
simple and easy-to-use software IMHO.
> Default Sort By: {Name, Type, Size, Modified, Owner, ...}
> - For the ones that would have definite categories (type, owner), it would
> be nice to have an explorer-like grouping type (see
> http://www.windowsdevcenter.com/windows/2005/04/19/graphics/figure1.gif)
That won't work with the default treeview widget. We'd need to write our
own treeview, which is really something for Thunar 2.0 (not sure if we
need this anyways, IIRC somebody suggested something similar for
nautilus some time ago).
> Directories Spring Open After <slider from 100ms to 2 seconds>
> - Auto-opening directories like ROX. Makes DND easier.
Hmhmh... sounds useful. Tho, dunno if it necessary to have an option for
the time.
> Notable omissions:
> - Single/Double click navigation: AFAIK, this is a global option for GTK.
> Thunar should follow it.
Nope, there's no concept for this in Gtk. The applications have to add
their own hacks to make single click navigation work. I.e., you can
check nautilus to see why this is a bad idea. ;-)
Since the rest of Gtk+/Xfce - atleast the parts that use the tree or
icon view widgets - work solely with double click navigation, it is not
very consistent and pretty confusing on first sight, to have single
click navigation in a widget which is otherwise double-click only.
Maybe something for Thunar 2.0 with a custom tree view widget.
> - Launch folders in new window: So far, Thunar doesn't seem to have a very
> spatial interface, and doesn't seem to be headed in that direction at
> all. I see no added benefit. If someone wants a filemanager that is
> spatial, I think they should use one designed that way.
ACK. If somebody wants to open a folder in a new window, he/she can
right-click -> 'Open in new window'.
> I also wonder if it's a good idea to store per-directory preferences
> (window size/position, view type, etc) in metadata if extended attributes
> are available. IMO, it would make for a nicer user experience.
I have no clue about this. I also thought it is very confusing if one
selects 'Icon view', then enters another directory and the file manager
switches to 'Tree view' and you'll have to select 'Icon view' again.
This is one point that drove me nuts while testing stuff in nautilus (it
is also one of the things I really dislike about Windows Explorer). But
maybe its just me. Is there any hidden concept behind this that I don't
know of?
> - Currently, if you click on a pathbar button which is a superdir of your
> current location, the subdirectories of the dir you clicked in disappear
> from the pathbar.
>
> Not only is this inconsistent with the GTK filechooser, it makes the
> pathbar less useful, since if each button represents a directory and
> can accept drags, you could put a file into the directory from which
> you just came, or rapidly switch back and forth, or many other uses.
>
> I think the pathbar should check if the current location is a subdir of
> the directory it's changing to. If it is, it should leave the buttons
> alone, else it should clear them.
This was changed per botsie's request. IIRC the exact reason was that
it's too confusing for a file manager. Anyways, I don't have any real
opinion here, but whatever the solution will be, it should be targeted
at easy, intuitive usage, not necessarily power users.
In general, when making suggestions, please try to keep in mind that
Thunar's primary goal is ease-of-use. Advanced users tend to have a
different opinion on what is easy to use, which is not necessarily easy
to use for others as well, or even worse, makes it harder to use for
others. This is one of the things that makes ROX bad: It offers some
geekish features that can make it easy to use for long-time users, but
very unintuitive for the average user. This is mostly because the
application behaves different than other Gtk+ applications.
Benedikt
--
Xfce -- small, stable, fast -- http://www.xfce.org/
(__)
(oo)
/------\/
/ | ||
* /\---/\
~~ ~~
...."Have you mooed today?"...
_______________________________________________
Thunar-dev mailing list
Thunar-dev@xfce.org
http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/thunar-dev
