Re: Major change in desktop handling

[Peter Harvey <pah06 uow edu au>]

On Fri, 2003-05-16 at 14:33, Dave Camp wrote:
> Here's my objection to $HOME-as-the-desktop:
> 
> Nautilus' desktop should be a user-managed space.  System-managed files
> do not belong on the desktop, even if they are hidden.
> 
> $HOME is the root of the user's writable filesystem.  All files owned by
> the user must be placed somewhere in $HOME (except for special cases
> like tmp files) - there's just nowhere else to put them.
> 
> So if you use $HOME as the desktop, you are forcing system-managed files
> to be on the desktop (even if they are hidden by default).  This doesn't
> make any sense - if a user turns on 'Show Hidden Files', they don't want
> their desktop cluttered with a bunch of system-managed files.
> 
> .gnome-desktop was a pain to use as a document directory, because file
> selectors defaulted to $HOME, and you couldn't get to ~/.gnome-desktop
> without knowing where to go and typing it in.  Using ~/Desktop improves
> that.  Making file selectors default to ~/Desktop will improve it
> further, in keeping with the idea of the desktop as a place for
> user-managed files.
> 
> -dave


I think I have quite a different interpretation of the situation. $HOME
is my first point of access for my files that I want to use. However,
the desktop is my first point of access when I want to manage my files.
For example, after I have downloaded .tar.gz or .ps.gz (which obviously
go into $HOME so that I can use them), I need to sort them (which is
what I use Nautilus for). It seems only natural then that $HOME should
be my desktop.

I do agree that your desktop shouldn't contain heaps of hidden system
files. But by the same thinking, when you begin a shell session you
*probably* shouldn't be in a directory full of hidden system (and quite
sensitive) files either. Although this will never happen, the system
files we all have in our home directory probably belong in a separate
directory altogether. Maybe $HOME/etc ?

Anyway, many people will already have an existing directory structure
which they use to organise their files, rooted at $HOME. Desktop thus
should be $HOME because, in general, it's easier to sort files downward
(into subdirectories) than upward (into parent) or sideways (into
sibling directories). Assume I had a directory structured like this:

/home/harvey/Desktop
/home/harvey/Papers

Assume that I then downloaded a file to my home directory. To move that
file into Papers I either use bash (byebye Nautilus) or startup a
Nautilus window, navigate to my home directory, and drag the file into
the Papers directory. If I downloaded the file to /home/harvey/Desktop,
the situation is just as bad, if not worse. But, if my Desktop was my
home directory, the file I download is right in front of me, as is the
target directory.

The obvious alternative is to have a structure like this, putting all my
directories on the new desktop:

/home/harvey/Desktop
/home/harvey/Desktop/Papers

and have all downloads go to my desktop. However, if I apply this to all
my data directories, then after starting bash I immediately have to "cd
Desktop" to actually get to any of my files. Essentially, we'd be trying
to deprecate all existing file tools (eg. bash) by decreeing that all a
person's files must now be in the Desktop directory.

For people who like a separate desktop directory, I agree that ~/Desktop
is better than ~/.gnome-desktop. But I still believe ~ is better than
~/Desktop.

-- 
Peter Harvey <pah06 uow edu au>
SITACS, University of Wollongong