Re: `New' sub-menu in desktop's rightclick-menu

[Alex Larsson <alexl redhat com>]

On 23 May 2002, Dave Bordoley wrote:

> On Wed, 2002-05-22 at 16:56, Alex Larsson wrote:
> 
> > In a perfect world $HOME as the desktop may make sense. But the fact is 
> > that we live in a hetrogenous environment, and a lot of apps write random 
> > stuff in $home that the user are not really interested in, and that are 
> > potentially dangerous to move/remove. Therefore I don't see 
> > home-as-desktop being the default in the near or medium term. I would like 
> > to make the desktop directory a visible directory though.
> 
> Conversly i argue that if a file is dangerous to remove than apps
> shouldn't be making these files non-hidden since even in the shell it
> would be too easy to delete these. However i do not want to argue the
> merit of $home as the desktop as we have discussed this about a million
> times in the past, i just wanted to give some reference for my idea.

What I am saying is that the fact is that they do this. And it won't 
change for quite a while.
 
> Just to note, i think i may try to do a complete install of redhat 7.3
> on a spare partition sometime and try to file bugs with every app that
> doesn't use hidden files. :)

Good luck. Most of them will probably get closed. We don't want to diverge 
to badly from the upstream versions, so we can't really change stuff like 
that.
 
> > They are not only interested in $HOME. They are also interested in the 
> > subdirectories of $HOME (and the folder icons for them are covered with 
> > app windows), other peoples homedirs, university-course specific 
> > directories, etc. 
> > 
> 
> Yeah but users could just click on these folders to open them if $home
> was the desktop. That was my point...but yes it doesn't make as much
> sense if $home isn't the desktop, i will grant you this... 

But the desktop has no "up", and it is almost always covered with you 
application windows.
 
> > There is an important difference between the context menu terminal and the 
> > panel terminal icon though. The context menu starts the terminal in the
> > particular directory the file manager is viewing, and therefore it in some 
> > sense lets you combine the best aspects of the terminal and the file 
> > manager. Starting the terminal from the panel loses the context you've 
> > build up in the window manager.
> 
> Uhh the context menu item new terminal always opens the terminal in
> $home regardless if the user is using $home as the desktop or not, so i
> don't think your statement is technically correct. I would claim having
> open with...terminal for directories is more helpful. There is no new
> terminal context menu in the file manager view.

Right, but it's a heavily requested feature, and I consider it a bug that 
we don't support it.

-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 Alexander Larsson                                            Red Hat, Inc 
                   alexl redhat com    alla lysator liu se 
He's an old-fashioned small-town filmmaker searching for his wife's true 
killer. She's a disco-crazy foul-mouthed mercenary from aristocratic European 
stock. They fight crime!