[Sugar-devel] [DESIGN] Proposal: Multi-Selection and Batch Operations on Journal entries
Ajay Garg
ajay at activitycentral.com
Mon Aug 13 02:05:41 EDT 2012
Hi Gary.
Made the change via the patch ::
http://git.sugarlabs.org/dextrose/mainline/commit/d9426b3b0be8249110d3073015d2514402734930
The latest sugar-rpm can be found at ::
http://people.sugarlabs.org/ajay/root/multi-select-latest-sugar-rpm-13th-august/sugar-0.94.1-31.dx3.noarch.rpm
Please test with it, on your dextrose image as usual :)
Thanks and Regards,
Ajay
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 5:24 AM, Gary Martin <garycmartin at googlemail.com>wrote:
> Hi Ajay,
>
> On 12 Aug 2012, at 20:30, Gary Martin <garycmartin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Ajay,
> >
> > On 8 Aug 2012, at 10:42, Ajay Garg <ajay at activitycentral.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Gary.
> >>
> >> Please find the link, for the latest sugar-rpm, that contains the
> fixes/changes, as per the 3 action-items marked for me, in 7th August's
> design-meeting ::
> >>
> http://people.sugarlabs.org/ajay/root/multi-select-with-checkbox-fix-plus-3-more-7th-august-action-items/sugar-0.94.1-31.dx3.noarch.rpm
> >>
> >> For brevity, here are the action items, and the corresponding patches ::
> >>
> >> #action improve batch tick redraw-intervals (ajay)
> >>
> http://git.sugarlabs.org/dextrose/mainline/commit/cdcf2717fe4bdd42cdbb632c51b0b371e2e3352f
> >
> > Spotted one case here, in line 96:
> >
> > if (current_entry_number % twenty_percent_of_total_items) == 0:
> >
> > If there are only a small number of items (e.g. 11) being batched
> operated on then it redraws too frequently (in ~2 at a time for 11
> entries), so is quite slow. Batch operations should be in blocks of 10 or
> more at a time (unless there are less than 10 items in which case do them
> all at once). This also means your test at line 80 isn't being usefully
> triggered and I think can be removed (as far as I can tell, please test).
> >
> > The test case at line 96 should be something like:
> >
> > if min (total_items, max (10, (current_entry_number %
> twenty_percent_of_total_items))) == 0:
>
> Sorry that test case for line 96 made little sense! Second attempt:
>
> if current_entry_number % max(10, twenty_percent_of_total_items)
> == max(10, twenty_percent_of_total_items) - 1:
>
> So this should refresh the list no more frequently than every 10th entry
> processed, and when there are > 50 entries the 20% starts to have an effect
> on the distance between updates so that not too much time is wasted
> redrawing when there are many entries being batch processed.
>
> Your test case at line 80 should stay so that at least the first page of
> entries gets a reasonably quick update if there are many entries being
> processes, and your clause at line 86 for redrawing at the last entry
> covers the case for when there are < 10 items.
>
> Apologies,
> --Gary
>
> >
> > Regards,
> > --Gary
> >
> >> #action change status strings to normal case and remove braces and /
> for friendly language (ajay)
> >>
> http://git.sugarlabs.org/dextrose/mainline/commit/767074994a0ea7f8356a1feafb7f2becae1b49f3
> >>
> >> #action make Stop aleart before batch operations really stop the batch
> operation (ajay)
> >>
> http://git.sugarlabs.org/dextrose/mainline/commit/f4ab20a311e5090aca2e1d757c6433eb19c5522a
> >>
> >>
> >> Please test as usual, on the dx3ng147 image :)
> >>
> >> Also, please let know for further feedback, on the mailing-list itself.
> The next Tuesday is still 6 days away :D :D
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks and Regards,
> >> Ajay
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Ajay Garg <ajay at activitycentral.com>
> wrote:
> >> Hi Gary.
> >>
> >> Finally... the checkbox-issue has been solved :)
> >>
> >> Please find the "fixed" rpm, containing the checkbox-fix at
> >>
> http://people.sugarlabs.org/ajay/root/multi-select-with-checkbox-fix/sugar-0.94.1-31.dx3.noarch.rpm
> >>
> >> For brevity, here is the patch link ::
> >>
> http://git.sugarlabs.org/dextrose/mainline/commit/381e706de7e7309d27a44ed064794a44d50aad4a
> >>
> >> The sugar-toolkit rpm remains the same as before.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> So, in addition to the "a) - i)" points of the previous mail, I add the
> next point ::
> >>
> >> j)
> >> Now there is prompt feedback of checking/unchecking the checkboxes and
> favorite-icons.
> >>
> >> However, note that for favorite-icons, there is a logical hinderance to
> >> true prompt feedback, as described in
> http://bugs.sugarlabs.org/ticket/3147.
> >>
> >> Checkboxes' feedbacks work perfectly !!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks and Regards,
> >> Ajay
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 12:02 PM, Ajay Garg <ajay at activitycentral.com>
> wrote:
> >> Hi Gary.
> >>
> >> Please find attached the links to the "fixed" rpms.
> >> Please "--upgrade --force --nodeps" on the dx3ng143 image, on which you
> have been testing.
> >>
> >>
> http://people.sugarlabs.org/ajay/root/multi-select/sugar-0.94.1-31.dx3.noarch.rpm
> >>
> http://people.sugarlabs.org/ajay/root/multi-select/sugar-toolkit-0.94.0-20120805.dx3.fc14.i386.rpm
> >>
> >>
> >> For brevity, the patches are at ::
> >>
> http://git.sugarlabs.org/dextrose/mainline/commit/38a261887ed44756147bae44277642252cae628f
> >>
> http://git.sugarlabs.org/dextrose/mainline/commit/0c71cf00dfb8fe507627109748b5539e0eeba87f
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Following are the changes/fixes ::
> >> All courtesy you :)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> a)
> >> 'Select none' renamed as 'Deselect all'.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> b)
> >> Now, a text-widget has been added to the top of EditToolBar.
> >> This serves the following two purposes ::
> >>
> >>
> >> * The widget is supposed to display only one line, at ANY time.
> >>
> >> * Usually, while in "multi-select" mode, it will display "<x> of 97
> selected", where "x" is the number of entries currently selected,
> >> and 97 is assumed to be the total number of entries.
> >>
> >>
> >> Here, as we select/deselect by single-click, or "select
> all"/"deselect all" button, the update happens consequently.
> >>
> >> So, as is obvious, this modification helps show the number of
> selected entries, even when entries are selected/deselected one at a time
> >> (previously, the status was shown, only when "select all" or
> "deselect all" was done).
> >>
> >> * During batch-copy, or batch-erase, this widget shows the running
> status of the entry currently being processed.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> c)
> >> Due to b), the progress-statuses are now NOT shown as alerts; rather as
> texts in the text-widget.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> d)
> >> However, any errors (such as "Entries without a file cannot be copied")
> are continued to be shown as alerts.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> e)
> >> Other than the progress-texts, and error-alerts, the only other
> notification shown are the confirmation-alerts before beginning
> >> with the "Batch-Copy" and "Batch-Erase".
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> f)
> >> During Batch-Operations (almost exclusively Batch-Copy), if an error
> occurs, users are presented with two options ::
> >>
> >> * "Stop" - This stops the batch-operation there and then.
> >>
> >> * "Continue" - Proceed forward with the next journal entry.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> g)
> >> As seen in f), the "Ok" of the error-alert has been replaced (only
> textually) by "Continue".
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> h)
> >> There were exceptions of the form "KeyError: 'keep'" occuring in logs.
> >> This was due to some cases, wherein "keep" property was not present in
> a particular journal entry.
> >>
> >> So now, as a fix, we first check if "keep" is a valid metadata-key. If
> yes, we read its value to gauge favorite-status.
> >> Else, we assume that the journal-entry is an unfavorite by default.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> i)
> >> VERY IMPORTANT NOTE ::
> >>
> >> Renaming a journal-entry (by clicking and modifying the contents of the
> title-cell, has been disabled functionally.
> >> This is because, the following happens when a rename is done in the
> "Documents" view ::
> >>
> >> * Initially, the UID is same as the path of the entry in "Documents".
> >>
> >> * User changes the name. The change is written on the DS, and the
> UID changed.
> >>
> >> * Now, since refresh is inhibited in multi-select view, we need to
> fetch the new value of the title from the DS.
> >> This requires the UID, through which the UID could be fetched.
> Since the name of the "Documents" journal-entry has
> >> changed, so has its UID. But in the memory, the old UID still
> resides. Fetching the "new" title from the "old" UID does not
> >> work.
> >>
> >> Now, I tried disabling the renaming while rendering the listview,
> but that could not be done, as rendering th listview requires
> >> knowing whether we are in multi-select mode, while multi-select
> mode is set, after the listview is rendered. So, we are in a catch-22
> >> situation.
> >>
> >> So, the way it works now in multi-select mode ::
> >>
> >> * User is apparently able to edit the title, but that is all what
> happens.
> >> There is no efective change - neither in backend, nor in frontend.
> >>
> >> In the normal view, the renaming works as usual.
> >>
> >>
> >> ======================================================
> >>
> >>
> >> PENDING CHANGES ::
> >>
> >> a)
> >> As explained in point i) above, the renaming will not work, while in
> multi-select mode (however, the bug you reported wherein trying to rename in
> >> "Documents" folder renders the UI unusable, has been duly fixed (of
> course, by not allowing the renaming to happen).
> >>
> >> If this is indeed required, this will be a major change in the way we
> deal with UIDs for non-journal mount-points. But given that renaming is
> affected only in multi-select mode (renaming does not work at all in
> multi-select; while it works as usual in normal-mode), I am a bit sceptical
> to regarding this.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> b)
> >> A solution to the following bug ::
> >>
> >>
> >> UNRESOLVED BUG. Tick-box slow/erratic behaviour in dx3ng143 with latest
> rpm fixes image on XO1, still needs mouse movement to redraw. This is also
> an issue when using the "Select all" toobar button, as the list view
> tick-boxes do not update until after the "Select all. You have selected N
> entries. (Ok)" dialogue is clicked.
> >>
> >> still eludes me :(
> >>
> >> This is an important issue, since (although there is no unusable UX, or
> any such major workflow blocker), the select/deselect "visual" "feedback"
> is an important thing, that should be conveyed as soon as possible. Though
> Gary's feedback on adding a text-widget on the top EditToolBar, does help
> show the number of entries selected, and thus gives a "textual" "feedback"
> :)
> >>
> >> I would request all sugar-devel members to please post a solution to
> the issue, for which the discussion is going on, in the thread ::
> >> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/2012-July/038626.html
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks and Regards,
> >> Ajay
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 9:59 PM, Gary Martin <garycmartin at googlemail.com>
> wrote:
> >> Hi Ajay,
> >>
> >>
> >> On 4 Aug 2012, at 10:21, Ajay Garg <ajay at activitycentral.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 8:53 PM, Ajay Garg <ajay at activitycentral.com>
> wrote:
> >>> Thanks a ton Gary.
> >>> This is REALLY useful :)
> >>
> >> Fab :)
> >>
> >>> Please find the comments inline.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 6:29 PM, Gary Martin <
> garycmartin at googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>> Hi Ajay/Anish,
> >>>
> >>> On 18 Jul 2012, at 11:57, Anish Mangal <anish at activitycentral.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I would like to propose the long-discussed-finally-implemented ;-)
> >>>> journal entry batch operation and multi selection feature for
> >>>> inclusion in sugar-0.98. All the necessary and relevant details should
> >>>> be present in the associated feature page:
> >>>>
> >>>> http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Features/Multi_selection_screenshots
> >>>>
> >>>> AFAIK, This feature was initially brought up in discussions in EDUJam
> >>>> in 2011 and an initial implementation was made by Martin Abente. The
> >>>> current implementation, done by Ajay, has been derived from that
> >>>> keeping the UI experience largely the same while significantly
> >>>> speeding up operations like select/deselect.
> >>>>
> >>>> Should you have any design related questions about this, feel free to
> >>>> reply to this thread.
> >>>
> >>> At last Tuesday's design meeting we didn't make it back around to this
> agenda item, so here's my feedback/notes after testing the DX3 image with
> the new rpms:
> >>>
> >>> - FIXED. Once in multi-select mode, the favourite stars no longer
> visibly updates, though changes update later once multi-select mode is
> exited.
> >>>
> >>> Great !!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> - FIXED. Auto deselection after batch operation.
> >>>
> >>> Great !!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> - UNRESOLVED BUG. Tick-box slow/erratic behaviour in dx3ng143 with
> latest rpm fixes image on XO1, still needs mouse movement to redraw. This
> is also an issue when using the "Select all" toobar button, as the list
> view tick-boxes do not update until after the "Select all. You have
> selected N entries. (Ok)" dialogue is clicked.
> >>>
> >>> Yep.. this is becoming a real pain.
> >>> I have tried the solutions listed at
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/2012-July/038626.html, but
> none seem to work :-\
> >>> Anyways, I am still trying ..
> >>>
> >>> [Ajay ACTION 1] : Fix this.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> - NEW BUG. Renaming an entry while in multi-select mode does not
> display the name change, only updates the name displayed after multi-select
> mode is exited.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks. Reproduced the bug at my side.
> >>>
> >>> [Ajay ACTION 2] : Will fix.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> - NEW BUG. If you rename while in multi-select and then try to copy,
> the entry can't be copied and raises an error "Entries without a filename
> cannot be copied."
> >>>
> >>> Hmm.. I think this is a false-negative.
> >>> I tried the following ::
> >>>
> >>> * Entered "multi-select" mode.
> >>>
> >>> * Selected an entry (by ticking the check-box).
> >>>
> >>> * Re-named the entry (however, the rename was not
> immediately visible, due to the above bug).
> >>>
> >>> * Copied the entry to "Documents".
> >>>
> >>> * Exited "multi-select" mode.
> >>>
> >>> * Clicked "Documents" icon.
> >>>
> >>> * The entry (WITH THE MODIFIED NAME) was present.
> >>>
> >>> I guess the error message "Entries without a file cannot be copied"
> occurred on an entry, that would have anyways given this message, even if
> you hadn't renamed the entry.
> >>>
> >>> [Gary ACTION 1] : Please let me know if you still face the error :)
> >>
> >> OK, sorry I must have missed an extra step (I can't reproduce this just
> now). Will email you if I can find a reliable way to reproduce it.
> >>
> >> However, I seem to have found a more nasty bug, while trying to test...
> Switch to the Journal Documents view; select an item; rename the selected
> item; the selected item will be deselected – though you'll still be in
> multi-select mode (but with nothing selected); click the toolbar button
> Select none; Journal will now be in a bad/unusable state, spinning busy
> cursor, can't escape multi select mode, shell log shows tracebacks IOError:
> Couldn't open metadata directory. I needed to restart Sugar to get back to
> normal. I'll post some shell logs in a separate email to you.
> >>
> >>> - UNRESOLVED DESIGN QUESTION. Should filters continue to work once in
> multi-select mode e.g: Filter for star favourite items in Journal; multi
> select all stared items; un-favourite some entries while in multi-select
> mode. Should they be removed from the multi-select view, or stay? Currently
> they stay, but this causes a visual 'jump' when exiting multi-select mode
> as the initial filter is re-applied to the view. Same issue if filtering
> the Journal by title, and you rename some entries while in multi-select
> mode.
> >>>
> >>> Well, I would say not to effect the change during multi-select mode,
> because of the following reasons ::
> >>>
> >>> * Currently, the code is tightly bound to having the
> "current" listmodel entries in the cache.
> >>> A re-fresh, would cause the cached entries to be
> re-distributed, requiring a very major code change.
> >>>
> >>> * The original motive of "allowing" the user to set/unset
> favorite status, and rename entry, is to help the user do the processing on
> the entry,
> >>> as she selects the entry. So, I guess it would be ok to
> effect the filters of these "secondary" features, AFTER the original action
> (copy,
> >>> erase) is completed, and "multi-select" mode exited.
> >>>
> >>> [Gary ACTION 2] : Anyhow, please let me know if you think otherwise :)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> - FEEDBACK. In multi-select mode the toolbar button string 'Select
> none' would be better renamed as 'Deselect all'.
> >>>
> >>> Ok.
> >>>
> >>> [Ajay ACTION 3] : Will fix.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> - TESTING. A loaded Journal with ~100 items, and a USB stick with 900+
> items was tested. Selecting individual items one by one is reasonable
> (ignoring the above unresolved redraw/event bug). Batch selecting,
> deselecting, erasing operations are pretty quick (batch feedback progress
> is helpful especially for the 900+ item case). Batch copying is the slowest
> operation (as to be expected), feedback progress here is essential for even
> a few items.
> >>>
> >>> [Gary ACTION 3] : Ok, so we show the progress for all = "Select",
> "Deselect", "Copy", "Erase", right?
> >>
> >> Yes, but in the primary title bar as a text widget.
> >>
> >>> - FEEDBACK. In the primary multi-select toolbar, add a separator and
> text widget to show how many items are selected, and how many are in the
> current multi-select view e.g. "Selected 3 of 123" so the current
> multi-select state is always visible to the user. This same widget can be
> used for progress feedback during batch operations e.g. "Copying 9 of 22:
> <title>", "Erasing 3 of 15: <title>", "Deselecting 5 of 17". This removes
> the need for all progress alerts during batch operations, see below.
> >>>
> >>> Gary, please clarify a bit more.
> >>> For eg, if a user wishes to do batch-copy on 15 entries (out of 97
> entries), so would the snapshots be like ::
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> <First row of text widget> Selected 15 of 97
> >>> <Second row of text widget> Copying 1 of 15 <title>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> <First row of text widget> Selected 15 of 97
> >>> <Second row of text widget> Copying 2 of 15 <title>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> <First row of text widget> Selected 15 of 97
> >>> <Second row of text widget> Copying 3 of 15 <title>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> <First row of text widget> Selected 15 of 97
> >>> <Second row of text widget> Copying 4 of 15 <title>
> >>>
> >>> ..
> >>> ..
> >>> ..
> >>> ..
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> <First row of text widget> Selected 15 of 97
> >>> <Second row of text widget> Copying 14 of 15 <title>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> <First row of text widget> Selected 15 of 97
> >>> <Second row of text widget> Copying 15 of 15 <title>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> OR WOULD IT BE SIMPLY
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> <First row of text widget> Copying 1 of 15 <title>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> <First row of text widget> Copying 2 of 15 <title>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> <First row of text widget> Copying 3 of 15 <title>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> <First row of text widget> Copying 4 of 15 <title>
> >>>
> >>> ..
> >>> ..
> >>> ..
> >>> ..
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> <First row of text widget> Copying 14 of 15 <title>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> <First row of text widget> Copying 15 of 15 <title>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> [Gary ACTION 4] : Please clarify.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I think I understood what is required.
> >>>
> >>> * The widget is supposed to display only one line, at ANY time.
> >>>
> >>> * Usually, while in "multi-select" mode, it will display "<x> of 97
> selected", where "x" is the number of entries currently selected.
> >>> Here, as we select/deselect by single-click, or "select all" /
> "deselect all" button, the update happens consequently.
> >>>
> >>> So, as is obvious, this modification helps show the number of
> selected entries, even when entries are selected/deselected one at a time
> >>> (previously, the status was shown, only when "select all" or
> "deselect all" was done).
> >>>
> >>> * During batch-copy, or batch-erase, this widget shows the running
> status of the entry currently being processed.
> >>>
> >>> * This seems to be a sleeker design, as it does do away with showing
> the running status as an alert.
> >>> After all, alerts are meant to convey a potentially major action ..
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> So, modified action for Gary :D ::
> >>> [Gary ACTION 4] : Please confirm, as to if my understanding
> is correct.
> >>
> >> Yes, that's it! :)
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> --Gary
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Sorry for the inconvenience.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks and Regards,
> >>> Ajay
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> - FEEDBACK. {confirmation_before, progress, confirmation_after}
> >>> ... select_none {N, N, N}
> >>> ... select_all {N, N, N}
> >>> ... erase {Y, N, N}
> >>> ... copying {Y, N, N}
> >>>
> >>> Ok. Got it :)
> >>>
> >>> [Ajay ACTION 4] : Will make the changes.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> - FEEDBACK. We should allow a user to abort a batch operation when an
> error occurs. Use cases, encountering many errors during a batch operation
> when a volume runs out of space, or becomes unavailable. One solution on
> other platforms is a check box for in the error dialogues "[√] Apply to
> all" (to ignore future errors of this type during this batch process),
> and/or an additional button "Stop". I'd suggest our batch operation errors
> dialogues add a "Stop" button to allow aborting the batch process, and that
> the current "Ok" button is renamed "Continue" to be more clear.
> >>>
> >>> Ok.
> >>> So,
> >>> * [Ajay ACTION 5] : We add a "Stop" button, which
> occurs on any error alert message.
> >>> If the user clicks the "Stop" button, the
> batch-operations ends there ans then.
> >>>
> >>> * [Ajay ACTION 6] : "Ok" button will be renamed to
> "Continue" button.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> - UNRESOLVED DESIGN QUESTION. Do we want to allow a user to abort a
> batch operation while it is in progress? Use case, copying/erasing many
> items over a slow network, or usb device, and deciding if it is not worth
> the wait. I think, for now, we can avoid this extra UI work as the batch
> features do provide the option to cancel before they begin. We should
> revisit this if it turns out to be a frustration for users. The UI design
> would likely be to add the cancel icon (X) to the primary toolbar while a
> batch operation is in progress.
> >>>
> >>> +1.
> >>> Anish too had suggested the same, but then we forfeited the idea, as
> this would make this (unnecessarily?) complex.
> >>>
> >>> Anyways, in-field experiences are the real teachers :D :D
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> --Gary
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Sugar-devel mailing list
> >>> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> >>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Gary, waiting for your responses :)
> >>>
> >>> Thanks again.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks and Regards,
> >>> Ajay
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20120813/034f0cda/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Sugar-devel
mailing list