Re: Inconsistent behaviour of Options



Hello Pavel,


On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 13:59:04 +0200 Pavel Tsekov <ptsekov gmx net> wrote:

> On Fri, 10 Mar 2006, wwp wrote:
> 
> > Hello Pavel,
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 10:59:25 +0200 Pavel Tsekov <ptsekov gmx net> wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 9 Mar 2006, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, 2006-03-09 at 23:14 +0100, Leonard den Ottolander wrote:
> > > > > Hi Jindrich,
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 2006-03-09 at 13:48 +0100, Jindrich Novy wrote:
> > > > > > 1. "Ok" sets the parameters only for the current session and won't
> > > > > > touch the ini file.
> > > > >
> > > > > "Ok" is equivalent to "save" if "auto save setup" is set.
> > > >
> > > > ... and if you exit from mc rather than e.g. close the xterm window.
> > > > And if you don't have another mc running that would overwrite those
> > > > settings if you exit from it properly.
> > > >
> > > > I think that "auto save setup" is something that cannot be implemented
> > > > reliably in mc unless you make "Ok" work exactly like "Save" and save
> > > > changes immediately.
> > >
> > > I think this is a reasonable approch. If we go that way we can safely
> > > remove "Save setup" and auto_save_setup.
> >
> > That means that you would not be able to modify some options w/o saving
> > them (and thus, affect all further instances)?
> 
> Hmm... This is a strong indication that those options do not belong to the
> Options menu, IMO.

If I'm not wrong there are options set outside from the Options menu/dialogs
that get saved, like user mini status in listing mode, I didn't feel
uncomfortable w/ that. Anyway, maybe the simple way would be the best, and
would be smth like only keeping a "Save options" menu entry that users must
explicitely use. I must admit that I'm a little bit lost now in the
discussion.. ;-)


Regards,

-- 
wwp

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]