Re: multi rooted tree sidebar

On Wed, 15 Jan 2003, Jeff Waugh wrote:

> <quote who="Wolfgang Pichler">
> > > Sure, but I think that's something that can be left to gconf-editor,
> > > rather than the in-your-face UI.
> > your right - you and all the other computer(gnome) experts around wouldn't
> > have a problem to add there new uris with gconf-editor to it - but i think
> > a "normal" user wouldn't even find the right key. So, why shouldn't we
> > give him a simple dropdown menu where he can do it ?
> Because, as I said in my first email, I don't think a normal user would be
> interested in doing it. Assuming we have, a) sensible defaults and b) a
> method for new modules/applications to add their own root nodes, the user's
> needs should be fulfilled.

I think that they would be very interested in it. It's like "mounting" an 
smb share in windows. It makes it easier to get to the places you 
regularly use (such as common network shares, project directories etc). 
This is a request we get a lot at RH.

> Example: Nautilus automagically installs 'My Home' and 'Root' nodes (whilst
> managing nodes for removable media too), gnome-vfs-extras installs
> 'Network', fontilus installs 'Fonts', nautilus-cd-burner could install
> something for CD burners (but that should really just pop up when any blank
> CD-like media is inserted), etc. There should probably be one for the
> control-center, again, installed by the control center itself.

Lets not add all sorts of crap to it and make it useless. How often do you 
manage files in fonts: or in the control center.

I think a good default list is:

<mounted removable media>

And then let the user easily add more. Preferably by drag and drop, but I
guess we have to have an accessible way too.

What about this gconf setup:

Nautilus automatically handles the above items. User added uris are stored 
in /apps/nautilus/sidebar_panels/tree/user_uris/. The name of the key is 
the escaped (gconf_escape_key/gconf_unescape_key) utf-8 display name, and 
the contents is the uri.
> For every entry I can think of, a sensible default exists. This suggests to
> me that it can 'just work' for 'normal users' and we can keep any additional
> specialised configuration in GConf, for technical users.
> Please point out some use cases where this doesn't appear to be true - we
> ought to challenge it. :-)

I challenge your point that only people who understand some strange gconf 
key setup would be interested in having a treeview that lets them do their 
file managing more efficiently.

 Alexander Larsson                                            Red Hat, Inc 
                   alexl redhat com    alla lysator liu se 
He's a lounge-singing devious dwarf who dotes on his loving old ma. She's a 
radical wisecracking vampire with an MBA from Harvard. They fight crime! 

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