Re: Feature Request

[Sriram Ramkrishna <sri aracnet com>]

On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 04:25:46PM -0700, Raul Acevedo wrote:
> Sriram Ramkrishna wrote:
> 
>  > The current stuff only serves to break the spatial feature.  If you
>  > implemented it wouldn't be spatial anymore it's more of a runaround
>  > to get spatial to act more like a browser.  Maybe it would be better
>  > to just make the browser portion better.
> 
> Some of us are intrigued by spatial mode, and just want a few options to
> get the best of both worlds.

Hrm.  I'm not against such things because in the end I want to be 
comfortable with how I manage my data with nautilus.  One possible
method is to maintain a set of patches that implements those.  With
a little persistence you might be able to pull off the features
you want.  It took quite a bit of time to get Alex and David to 
even develop the spatial concept.

>  > Spatial does require you manage your data differently.  For instance,
>  > as an old unix hat I don't have directories with any depth greater
>  > than 4.  Mostly because I don't like typing more than that.  I don't
>  > see how anybody would want to type long paths..
> 
> Having a program require you to change how you manage your data is
> terrible.  But I think spatial is not about making you change how you
> store your data, it's about assuming that most people store data a
> particular way.

Well, in my situation working in shell all the time forced me to not
make deep directories while I could have used aliases, completion etc
it's still harder to remember data thats more than 4 levels deep.  So
my choice of data management was independent of nautilus or any gui
program really.  But, that said, point taken most people don't like
to change what they are comfortable with. (which is why we have this
thread to some extent :-)

The underlying concept in spatial is the assumption that you're using 
nautilus to do file management which spatial does very well.  It's
however not great if you're looking for something.  But rather than
fussing with nautilus why not write a system that efficiently does
that?  Seth has his storage project, and there is also medusa.  There
is also dashboard that will tie everything together.  Thats where
the real interesting stuff is.  

Renewing interest in these projects and coding for them would be a
lot more interesting.

> The problem is that (1) there are a LOT of people that don't have four
> level hierarchies and (2) the annoyance level of spatial when you don't
> fit the model is extremely high.  You put those two together, and the
> argument for making spatial be the default --- or certainly for not
> having provided an option to turn it off --- goes out the door.

I agree.  That is a problem, and short of re-arranging your data I
don't have an intelligent solution to address that.  I did have a
lot of clutter in my $HOME which I used nautilus to clean up.

> Fortunately this is all being addressed.  Thank you developers!  :)
> 
>  > Before spatial I hardly used nautilus because I tended to use
>  > nautilus to do file operations and browser mode sucked for that.  I
>  > use it a lot more now and it's great!  Try it for awhile.
> 
> I did, and hated it.  Too many freakin' windows.

Well tehy do have middle mouse click although I don't like it
that much and rather use browser mode since I'm not doing file
managing there.

>  > Anyways, retrofitting spatial into something it's not isn't the right
>  > solution.
> 
> Again, the idea isn't to change spatial, it's to give a few options on

But it is, you want a hybrid from the beginning of your message.  You
want the best of both worlds. :)

> its behavior.  If you don't like the options don't change them.  At
> least with them both the spatial purists and the rest of the world can
> be happy. 

See earlier in my message about making browsing efficient by using a 
different system.

sri