Re: Howto rename a file without...

[Calum Benson <Calum Benson Sun COM>]

On 24 Aug 2008, at 04:02, Mark wrote:

> I know that, Matthias. That seems to be about the default gnome reply
> when a user doesn't like something. Or the reply is: "make a patch for
> it". I just find it strange that a working feature doesn't get
> disabled but just thrown away.

Ultimately, we have to accept that the nautilus maintainers removed  
the feature rather than disabling it because they felt that was the  
best thing to do.  It's their code, and they get to make the final  
decision-- if it's a waste of development time, at least it's usually  
their own.

> And if you want to remove stupid things from nautilus/gnome then i
> have a few more (sarcasm):

Sarcasm mode noted, but here are the real reasons most of those  
features are different from click-to-rename:

> - the 2 panels that slide in never goes smooth.. feel free to remove
> it (including the gconf settings)

This doesn't cause the user to inadvertently enter a mode which has no  
obvious signposts for getting out, nor does it cause any potential  
data loss (the previous name of the file).

There is also already a gconf key to turn off such animations anyway,  
albeit more for the benefit of thin clients than people for whom it  
isn't smooth enough :)

> - the text inside icons makes nautilus slower so remove that as well
> (can be turned off, i know)

No hidden modes or potential data loss involved.

> - thumbnailing images.. why do that if they are way out of proportion
> to the icons.. so remove it

No hidden modes or potential data loss involved.

> - Remove the options to have icons on the desktop because there is no
> proper grid to align them on anyway

Nautilus can already be instructed not to draw any icons on the  
desktop.  Again, no hidden modes or potential data loss involved  
anyway, though.

> - What's the use of the now bloated gedit if we have "vi" as well?  
> remove it.

A (rarely-stated, these days) goal of GNOME at one point was to ensure  
the user didn't have to resort to the terminal to perform basic  
tasks.  I'd guess that's still the case.

> - What's the use of gnome-panel anyway.. we have lighter and faster
> alternatives. remove it.

Backwards compatability.  It's already a slightly hairy (but sometimes  
necessary) experience logging into different versions of GNOME 2.x  
from the same home directory; if some of those versions replaced the  
panel with something else altogether, it would be a nightmare.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Gimmie or something similar step up to  
the plate in GNOME 3.0, though.

> - nautilus itself is a waste and bulky.. why not replace it by thunar
> or dolphin?

If and when they meet the basic criteria for inclusion in GNOME that  
all other modules have to, there's no reason they couldn't be proposed  
AFAIK.

> - Who ever invented icon view... lets remove it and introduce color
> codings. a unique color for each file. and displaying a rainbow for
> folders with a lot of files (10k+)

Sounds cool, let's do it :)

Cheeri,
Calum.

--
CALUM BENSON, Usability Engineer       Sun Microsystems Ireland
mailto:calum benson sun com            GNOME Desktop Team
http://blogs.sun.com/calum             +353 1 819 9771

Any opinions are personal and not necessarily those of Sun Microsystems