KDE/kdevplatform/plugins/projectmanagerview

[Dan Leinir Turthra Jensen]

On Tuesday 23 June 2009 10:56:50 Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> On 23.06.09 09:58:23, Dan Leinir Turthra Jensen wrote:
> > On Tuesday 23 June 2009 08:32:39 Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> > > On 22.06.09 22:00:52, David Nolden wrote:
> > > > SVN commit 985481 by zwabel:
> > > >
> > > > Don't collapse items on single-click. Since it should be possible to
> > > > just select something in the project-manager, collapsing the item is
> > > > often an annoying and unexpected action.
> > >
> > > I don't like this at all. If a single click expands, then another click
> > > should collapse the tree. Thats the normal behaviour.
> > >
> > > However I agree that its annoying that you cannot select something
> > > easily. So how about we only expand/collaps on double click?
> >
> >   Down this path lies dragons. Seriously, don't start implementing this
> > sort of thing - we've just removed the custom click handling in Amarok
> > because it was a nightmare for both developers and users to keep track
> > of. i said this on IRC yesterday as well, and i hope that people will
> > listen to experience on this one.
>
> Uhm, I don't see a problem with that, because all we do is handle folders
> (or expandable items) in the doubleClick slot. The activate slot will still
> contain the code to open files, hence KDE's single-click behaviour is only
> worked around for folders/expandable items.

  The point is that it's worked around at all. i of course can't stop you, but 
trust me, this /will/ become a problem. Because KDE's single-click behaviour 
isn't single-click behaviour. It's "whatever the user likes" behaviour. So, 
you force this, and people who happen to like double-click will no longer be 
able to use that.

> > > The QTest toolview also provides a solution by implementing something
> > > similar to dolphins "+/-" overlay icons, but personally I'd like simple
> > > double-click behaviour better.
> >
> >   Dolphin's solution is designed specifically to alleviate the problems
> > described above. Please! please use that in stead.
>
> This needs a _lot_ more code to be implemented properly than we should
> spend on this. Apart from that in a treeview (small icons, little space)
> this thing eats up too much of the treeview space, especially when the tree
> gets deeper.

  i am aware that it will take more work (a lot), but it really is something 
you should consider doing really, really carefully. And your track record does 
show that considering things is indeed something you do - i hope you'll apply 
it here as well :)

-- 
..Dan // Leinir..
http://leinir.dk/

                          Co-
                            existence
                          or no
                            existence

                          - Piet Hein