On 01.12.2009 00:04, Steve Borho wrote: > On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Sune Foldager <sune.folda...@me.com> wrote: >> Steve Borho wrote: >>> On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 8:44 AM, Adrian Buehlmann <adr...@cadifra.com> >>> wrote: >>>> I've started to asking myself these days why the "diff to second parent" >>>> checkbox in the log >>>> viewer has to be on the bottom of the window. >>>> >>>> I find it more and more unhandy, to have to move the mouse pointer to the >>>> bottom of the window >>>> in order to switch the diff to the second parent. >>>> >>>> If there are no objections, I would propose to move it to the top. But if >>>> anyone prefers to >>>> keep it where it is, then let's keep it. It's no big deal, and as always: >>>> surely a matter >>>> of taste as well. >>>> >>>> Note that the "diff to second parent" checkbox is only shown for merge >>>> changesets. >>>> And it defaults to showing the diff to the first parent. >>> It is more natural on top of the file list, especially now that the >>> column headers are hidden. >> I agree. While we're at it, IMO using a checkbox is not ideal since >> there is nothing special about the first parent vs. the second parent >> diff in most cases, so maybe a radio button instead? >> >> Diff again which parent? ( ) first ( ) second. >> >> or something similar? > > Indeed.
Horizontal layout of radio buttons is not recommended: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa511488.aspx As such I would lean towards keeping it as is (checkbox) in this particular case we have here. The single checkbox also uses lesser space, compared to two horizontal radio buttons. If it were in a dialog box with enough vertical space, then I would prefer using radio buttons. But then, the radio buttons would have to be laid out vertically. As such the filter bar is setting a somewhat bad precedent here (although it is not directly comparable, given the more than two choices the user has there). See also http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20040927.html, point 6 in section "Additional Guidelines". The single checkbox is also acceptable, because the two parents are not strictly on a par, since normal changesets have only a first parent and no second parent. The second parent *is* special. The second parent can also be seen as the one that is "merged-in", whereas the first parent usually forms the link back on the current branch. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Join us December 9, 2009 for the Red Hat Virtual Experience, a free event focused on virtualization and cloud computing. Attend in-depth sessions from your desk. Your couch. Anywhere. http://p.sf.net/sfu/redhat-sfdev2dev _______________________________________________ Tortoisehg-develop mailing list Tortoisehg-develop@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tortoisehg-develop
