Konqueror delete unification

Thu Jul 24 22:16:06 BST 2003

Yes, this problem would be solved if the Trash worked properly, and 
there was only one "Delete" option, which would move files to the Trash, 
*properly*, with the ability to recover to where it was deleted, and 
check for date of deletion and the like.

Then the "Really delete" option (which is now named Delete) could be 
hidden on a key combination with no remorse.

Aaron J. Seigo wrote:

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>On Monday 14 July 2003 12:29, b.walter at free.fr wrote:
>  
>
>>On Monday 14 July 2003 19:16, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>>(1) I know there are many users who like the ability to store files in
>>>>the trash, or decide not to. With this patch, you can still do that. It
>>>>just is a keyboard shortcut not a RMB action.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>which is even more hidden than a RMB action...
>>>      
>>>
>>That's only a question of improving usability for advanced users or normal
>>users.
>>    
>>
>
>but it ignores the common case where simply moving it to a specified folder, 
>which is what KDE's trash does, is not acceptable. killing one usability 
>problem only to create another is not good, IMHO. changing the way the UI 
>works, especially something as fundamental as deletion of files, is not 
>something one should do lightly as it has vast effects on how people can and 
>do use the system.
>
>  
>
>>Most users do not make a difference between "Move to Trash" and
>>"Delete".
>>    
>>
>
>yes, this is very true. the problem is real; the proposed solution is not.
>
>  
>
>>Renaming "Delete" to "Destroy File" would help a little bit, 
>>anyway, keeping the 2 entries by default is dangerous and will remove many
>>advantages of using a trash.
>>    
>>
>
>if one decides to Move To Trash, there is indeed an advantage to using the 
>trash. that has nothing to do with being in proximity to Delete.
>
>  
>
>>For the rare cases where you really want to avoid Trash (very large file),
>>using a key-shortcut is not a problem.
>>    
>>
>
>if you know about it. KDE's "submarine features" are, not surprisingly, not 
>well known. even amongst KDE developers.
>
>  
>
>>Keeping the dangerous options as 
>>easy to access as other actions (even with a confirmation dialog) would be
>>a big mistake.
>>    
>>
>
>i've never heard of a context menu item that is covered by a confirmation 
>dialog as being "easy to access" ;-) ok, so the items are also in the Edit 
>menu, which makes them a bit more accessable, but i'd still hesitate to say 
>they are easily accessable.
>
>heck, i just recently made them less easily accessable by switching the 
>default button on the dialog to Cancel. =)
>
>  
>
>>And for advanced users, it would be easy, and would not take too much place
>>to add in the configuration dialog :
>>    
>>
>
>the configuration dialogs in konqueror are a mess. this is a 
>microconfiguration issue that masks the _real_ problem/issue. is making the 
>config dialogs more crowded with difficult to understand issues only to treat 
>the symptoms and not the problems a good idea?
>
>also consider that many "average" users go through the config dialogs, while 
>context menus are the realm of fewer (and usually more skilled) users. so 
>we'd be shifting the bad situation from a place fewer people are affected and 
>are better able to deal with it, to one where more people need to deal with 
>it. 
>
>and we still don't solve the problem, and in fact create a less satisfactory 
>result for some (cf. all the discussion regarding remote / removable media, 
>file sizes, etc) 
>
>  
>
>>But please do not leave these 2 actions together by default !
>>    
>>
>
>i agree with this sentence. i don't agree with the proposed solution. (in case 
>that wasn't abundantly clear ;)
>
>  
>
>>>the real solution lies elsewhere. and it's also why i've stayed out of
>>>this discussion =)  KDE really, really needs a trash:// protocol. i have
>>>beginnings of such a thing here, but as others have done, i've
>>>delinquently let it languish.
>>>      
>>>
>>I don't think it was such a good idea to stay out of discussion. They are
>>people who really want to help and who have taken some time to code, and
>>you come at the end of the discussion, saying that you have a totally
>>different solution...
>>    
>>
>
>sorry... =(  we've actually had the trash discussion before in the distanct 
>past; repitition is only fun if you haven't heard it before. and i don't like 
>just stepping into the middle of someone's ideas and saying, "you're off base 
>because of <insert reason>". i already do that too much for my likings on 
>kde-usability =) it also often occurs to me that the person speaking may 
>actually be seeing something i'm missing, so i try to take the time to 
>listen; sometimes that results in not entering the discussion until later on. 
>in any case, my bad, sorry.
>
>hrm... and now to find a few extra hours in the day ......... =)
>
>- -- 
>Aaron J. Seigo
>GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA  EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43
>
>KDE: The 'K' is for 'kick ass'
>http://www.kde.org       http://promo.kde.org/3.1/feature_guide.php
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: GnuPG v1.2.2-rc1-SuSE (GNU/Linux)
>
>iD8DBQE/Evtu1rcusafx20MRAm+TAJ9/ZPZnjHi0CVQNY5ZNmdw97WY+kgCfXrGR
>k4j4wAzGS0TirUPiq5Yq2rk=
>=SQg7
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>_______________________________________________
>kde-usability mailing list
>kde-usability at mail.kde.org
>http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-usability
>  
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.kde.org/mailman/private/kfm-devel/attachments/20030724/443f57b9/attachment.htm>