<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 8:03 PM, Anish Mangal <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:anish@activitycentral.com" target="_blank">anish@activitycentral.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----<br>
Hash: SHA1<br>
<div class="im"><br>
On Wednesday 18 July 2012 07:56 PM, Ajay Garg wrote:<br>
> Hi Samuel.<br>
><br>
> Please find the replies inline.<br>
><br>
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 7:03 PM, Samuel Greenfeld<br>
</div><div><div class="h5">> <<a href="mailto:greenfeld@laptop.org">greenfeld@laptop.org</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:greenfeld@laptop.org">greenfeld@laptop.org</a>>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> I see in the final screenshots that all of the selected items are<br>
> deselected.<br>
><br>
> Is this automatic, or does the user have to choose the "deselect<br>
> all" button to do this?<br>
><br>
><br>
> This is automatic (on the fly).<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Personally I would prefer if the checkboxes remain selected in the<br>
> source view (if not an erase operation that removes the item).<br>
> That would allow the user to do multiple actions (Copy then Erase<br>
> for a "Move"), and confirm after the operation that they selected<br>
> the items they intended to select.<br>
><br>
><br>
> Well, the code is generic enough, and the above may be accomplished<br>
> if there is a general consensus.<br>
><br>
> However, the current flow (automatic de-selection), "helps" user to<br>
> "not deselect" "explicitly", in the general case.<br>
><br>
> I believe that copy-then-erase is a more of a special case, than a<br>
> general one. For eg., copying-from-a-USB-pendrive-to-journal is<br>
> more probable, than<br>
> copying-from-a-USB-pendrive-to-journal-and-then-erasing-the-contents-of-USB-pendrive.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> It seems from these screenshots like we are trying to indicate<br>
> copying progress by deselecting items as we copy them, and I do<br>
> not know of another OS that does that.<br>
><br>
><br>
> The workflow is ::<br>
><br>
> (i) Operate on entry "x".<br>
><br>
> (ii) Deselect the entry "x".<br>
><br>
> (iii) Goto step (i)<br>
><br>
><br>
> Also, it's good if Sugar tries to be different, as long as it does<br>
> the right thing :P<br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
</div></div>I think I can offer one explanation why it now, the way it is.<br>
Of-course, whether it's the right way to do things or needs to change,<br>
needs to be determined by this design discussion.<br>
<br>
During the initial stages of the development of this feature, the<br>
select and deselect operations were quite slow, because every<br>
select/deselect change was being written to the journal entry metadata.<br>
This made it essential to show progress of both select/deselect as the<br>
operation often took several seconds (in some cases minutes)<br></blockquote><div><br><br>Just wanted to clarify, that it wasn't Martin's code that was slowing this down.<br><br>It was me, who had re-factored quite a bit of code, to incorporate the differences as listed in <br>
<a href="http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Features/Multi_selection_screenshots#History">http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Features/Multi_selection_screenshots#History</a>.<br><br>There, in the first iteration, the "selected" metadata was being written onto disk. <br>
<br>Thankfully, Anish interrupted promptly, and the "selection" metadata was then held in memory.<br> <br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<br>
However, later the operation was sped up significantly to just a few<br>
seconds even in case of many entries (because the select/deselect info<br>
was just being stored in-memory). So this may very well be a remnant<br>
of the way development for this feature took place.<br>
<br>
Just my 2 cents.<br>
<br>
Anish<br>
<div class="im"><br>
><br>
><br>
> Regards, Ajay<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 6:57 AM, Anish Mangal<br>
</div>> <<a href="mailto:anish@activitycentral.com">anish@activitycentral.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:anish@activitycentral.com">anish@activitycentral.com</a>>><br>
<div class="im">> wrote:<br>
><br>
> Hi,<br>
><br>
> I would like to propose the long-discussed-finally-implemented ;-)<br>
> journal entry batch operation and multi selection feature for<br>
> inclusion in sugar-0.98. All the necessary and relevant details<br>
> should be present in the associated feature page:<br>
><br>
> <a href="http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Features/Multi_selection_screenshots" target="_blank">http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Features/Multi_selection_screenshots</a><br>
><br>
> AFAIK, This feature was initially brought up in discussions in<br>
> EDUJam in 2011 and an initial implementation was made by Martin<br>
> Abente. The current implementation, done by Ajay, has been derived<br>
> from that keeping the UI experience largely the same while<br>
> significantly speeding up operations like select/deselect.<br>
><br>
> Should you have any design related questions about this, feel free<br>
> to reply to this thread.<br>
><br>
> Cheers, Anish _______________________________________________<br>
> Sugar-devel mailing list <a href="mailto:Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org">Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org</a><br>
</div>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org">Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org</a>><br>
> <a href="http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel" target="_blank">http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel</a><br>
<div class="im">><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing<br>
> list <a href="mailto:Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org">Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel" target="_blank">http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel</a><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
</div>- --<br>
Anish Mangal<br>
Dextrose Project Manager<br>
Activity Central<br>
<br>
<br>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)<br>
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - <a href="http://enigmail.mozdev.org/" target="_blank">http://enigmail.mozdev.org/</a><br>
<br>
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJQBslFAAoJEBoxUdDHDZVpRmYH/3PvlTLgm6DfaCtD7LWPsK7L<br>
8EM6UDjk7GfNsibvN9kwwahQOBUGBzXbnFdrfaztORIHjSLbo8SPSoHkuzdGpedF<br>
WcQnmcuIhgWzJTixWQFJjd4lkFQmEz/CIIIwg0QkVVvam++nKZxX95YPDK3xv6o8<br>
wm1fvLTf80K5PD9I9sokmGTC9tz7lJ9dwWc9NkBiQgvxJxSUJkPjeez+8bjWTfhg<br>
eIk/sE16B6tr1SnzU3AHctVlfs7eh9rc22vXsy9LX4Kh1XnW9f06YFFoTWSDjTtl<br>
phjwETf3LpunpETaJcrc1Zb5wSqLbHTnS6GyVN+bBdnTZVfpB0PD5IsuKqAovnY=<br>
=0yr5<br>
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>
</blockquote></div><br>