Decision needed for "Move to Trash"

[Mark Kretschmann]

On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 8:43 AM, Leo Franchi <lfranchi at kde.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 1:39 AM, Mark Kretschmann <kretschmann at kde.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 8:24 AM, Lydia Pintscher <lydia at kde.org> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 05:28, Casey Link <unnamedrambler at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> The solution is to do as Bart and Nikolaj have suggested: Add a "Show
>>>> in Collection/File Browser" action to the playlist context menu.
>>>> Initiating this action will show the selected track in the file or
>>>> collection browser, where *ALL* the collection/file management actions
>>>> can be accessed not just Trash.
>>>
>>> That solution is all nice and dandy and might satisfy a lot of people.
>>> The problem with it: It's not there!
>>
>> I tend to agree with Lydia here. There have been made some proposals
>> (jumping to Collection Browser, File Browser, and whatnot), but all
>> that is Vaporware (and I have my doubts if such "Jump from A to B"
>> schemes really work well). And for those who like to praise the File
>> Browser, they quickly forget that this browser is still missing some
>> important features (PUD support, AppendAndPlay support), which is
>> problematic in itself, as noone wants to work on that.
>
> Missing PUD support doesn't really have much to do with the fact that
> the functionality we're discussing should be logically placed in it's
> correct place. If the PUD is missing, either it should be added or it
> won't be, but that shouldn't be a reason for/against adding something
> to the playlist menu that is in the file browser menu already.

Adding PUD support to it is not trivial at all, in fact is has been
tried, and failed. You can go ahead and try it, and then you'll see
what technical challenges there are (the File Browser is basically
KDirOperator, you'd have to hack yourself into there somehow). And
such inconsistencies are not minor at all, in fact they are very bad.
Half-working stuff isn't cool in any way.

>> I'm currently counting 5 entries in the Playlist menu, after Louis had
>> done the menu cleanup for 2.2.2 (he moved the Cover Image actions into
>> an "Album" sub-menu). So I don't see any usability issues with
>> overcrowding either.
>
> You do realize what you're saying is contradictory, right? "X just
> cleaned it up by making it shorter, that's good. Let's make it
> longer."

Meep. Ever heard of "balance"? There is such a thing as "too many",
and "too few". And then there is a "sweet spot". What this sweet spot
exactly is, that's not easy to tell, but it can be found.

So I did not contradict myself :) You just need to learn a thing or
two about usability.

-- 
Mark Kretschmann
Amarok Developer
Fellow of the Free Software Foundation Europe
www.kde.org - amarok.kde.org - www.fsfe.org