Written by wolterh the 11 Mar 09 at 02:40.

I propose to give every item, on it's properties, an option to gravitate to one of either extremes of the panel. This way, when you remove an item the items will maintain their organization making your panels look clean without an effort.

I propose to give every item, on it's properties, an option to gravitate to one of either extremes of the panel. This way, when you remove an item the items will maintain their organization making your panels look clean without an effort.

Written by stevemot the 11 Mar 09 at 14:26.

The main reason that re-organizing the Panel is such a pain is that the user has to unlock each of the items on the Panel individually before they can be moved. This solution proposes to add a right-click context menu item to the Panel to unlock all of the objects in the Panel, allowing them to be dragged about at will. When finished, the user just selects a corresponding "Lock all" option. The advantage with this solution is that it should not require any changes to the many objects that can be added to the Panel, only to the Panel itself (it just needs to walk through its list of objects calling "unlock" on each one).

The main reason that re-organizing the Panel is such a pain is that the user has to unlock each of the items on the Panel individually before they can be moved. This solution proposes to add a right-click context menu item to the Panel to unlock all of the objects in the Panel, allowing them to be dragged about at will. When finished, the user just selects a corresponding "Lock all" option. The advantage with this solution is that it should not require any changes to the many objects that can be added to the Panel, only to the Panel itself (it just needs to walk through its list of objects calling "unlock" on each one).

Written by kenden the 17 Mar 09 at 23:46.

What is the use of the "Lock To Panel" feature?

Locking a icon into place in the panel? To avoid it moving around?

But why would it move around?

Only because the user would move it!

And if the user wants to move it, why would she unlock it, move it and lock it back?

What's the point of having it locked?
The icons are not going to move by themselves!

What is the use of the "Lock To Panel" feature? Locking a icon into place in the panel? To avoid it moving around? But why would it move around? Only because the user would move it! And if the user wants to move it, why would she unlock it, move it and lock it back? What's the point of having it locked? The icons are not going to move by themselves!

Written by axayg the 18 Mar 09 at 02:25.

Solution#2 is definitely great. However, this is the simplest to implement and is, at the face of it, a simple copy-paste from M$ Windows. We should do something better than that. eg.
Graviate to one of the sides or make the icon panel slightly sticky. That way when you want to move icons in/out, drag/drop anywhere else on the panel, it does not come off just like that. It makes some sound like "pluck" and is clearly shows that its coming out of a sticky panel. That way, a firm lock is not necessarily needed - a firm lock could be an add-on to enable/disable moving around of icons.

Solution#2 is definitely great. However, this is the simplest to implement and is, at the face of it, a simple copy-paste from M$ Windows. We should do something better than that. eg. Graviate to one of the sides or make the icon panel slightly sticky. That way when you want to move icons in/out, drag/drop anywhere else on the panel, it does not come off just like that. It makes some sound like "pluck" and is clearly shows that its coming out of a sticky panel. That way, a firm lock is not necessarily needed - a firm lock could be an add-on to enable/disable moving around of icons.

Written by tchalvakspam the 19 Mar 09 at 16:16.

The problem is that the panel is a line, and it's hard to keep stuff organized on that line.

So: Allow the panel to be "broken" visually, whether by separators that are transparent or the converse, by allowing grouping the elements on the panel in groups and then letting the space in-between groups become transparent.

So instead of 1 long panel, you could visually split the panel into left and right, or left middle right, or other user-specified organizations.

The key here is that instead of looking like one long worm panel, it should essentially look like multiple sections, each appearing as an independent part of the user interface, even while the underlying system remains intact.

The problem is that the panel is a line, and it's hard to keep stuff organized on that line. So: Allow the panel to be "broken" visually, whether by separators that are transparent or the converse, by allowing grouping the elements on the panel in groups and then letting the space in-between groups become transparent. So instead of 1 long panel, you could visually split the panel into left and right, or left middle right, or other user-specified organizations. The key here is that instead of looking like one long worm panel, it should essentially look like multiple sections, each appearing as an independent part of the user interface, even while the underlying system remains intact.

Written by tchalvakspam the 19 Mar 09 at 16:28.

Another approach to allow better organization of the panel is to provide slide-out sections of panel that can contain multiple icons within them. Like a more robust version of the "Drawer" panel applet that integrates with the panel better. In essence, different sections of the panel could be clicked to slide out a larger section of panel space which would contain more icons, or could just slide out with a stack of the icons it contains themselves. So if you wanted to add links to a number of websites, you could add the drawer-stack and stick all the icons inside it, then when you wanted to launch one site or another, you would click the part of the drawer-stack, it would slide open to show all the icons inside it, and then you would launch the one you wanted.

One ideal implementation of this can be seen in the "stacks" of the dock in OSX Leopard and the "stack" applet of the Cairo-dock app for ubuntu.

Another approach to allow better organization of the panel is to provide slide-out sections of panel that can contain multiple icons within them. Like a more robust version of the "Drawer" panel applet that integrates with the panel better. In essence, different sections of the panel could be clicked to slide out a larger section of panel space which would contain more icons, or could just slide out with a stack of the icons it contains themselves. So if you wanted to add links to a number of websites, you could add the drawer-stack and stick all the icons inside it, then when you wanted to launch one site or another, you would click the part of the drawer-stack, it would slide open to show all the icons inside it, and then you would launch the one you wanted. One ideal implementation of this can be seen in the "stacks" of the dock in OSX Leopard and the "stack" applet of the Cairo-dock app for ubuntu.

Written by jyaan the 21 Mar 09 at 19:20.

One of the most basic elements of organization on computers is the frame. We use it in GTK+, and of course it has been used on web pages.

I propose that icons can be placed (at the user's option) in a rectangular area. This will not affect the visible appearance of the panel; it is only for organization. It should also allow empty space between icons.

This would allow groups of icons to be treated as a whole (although still movable within the frame, and able to be dragged in and out of the frame), and therefore each frame's contents will never end up mixed with each other.

Typically, I keep certain types of icons/applets together, and being able to drag several at the same time, and not losing their order (on screen resize, for example) would be great.

The user should be able to move the frame from the left edge just as we already do with the notification area and window list.

The problem with most of the solutions is that you'll still need to micro-manage your icons and move them one at a time. If I want to move my launcher icons from one side to the other, I'd like to just drag them as a group. Won't be a problem with Multi-monitor setups, either.

One of the most basic elements of organization on computers is the frame. We use it in GTK+, and of course it has been used on web pages. I propose that icons can be placed (at the user's option) in a rectangular area. This will not affect the visible appearance of the panel; it is only for organization. It should also allow empty space between icons. This would allow groups of icons to be treated as a whole (although still movable within the frame, and able to be dragged in and out of the frame), and therefore each frame's contents will never end up mixed with each other. Typically, I keep certain types of icons/applets together, and being able to drag several at the same time, and not losing their order (on screen resize, for example) would be great. The user should be able to move the frame from the left edge just as we already do with the notification area and window list. The problem with most of the solutions is that you'll still need to micro-manage your icons and move them one at a time. If I want to move my launcher icons from one side to the other, I'd like to just drag them as a group. Won't be a problem with Multi-monitor setups, either.

Written by kiersie the 31 Mar 09 at 22:10.

Just like the panels dont move without holding alt-button down since gnome 2.26 do also withe applet/icons

Just like the panels dont move without holding alt-button down since gnome 2.26 do also withe applet/icons

Written by MestreLion the 11 Jun 09 at 23:42.

This brainstorm has so many ideas because we are trying to address several issues in 1 solution: avoid icon micro-management, ordering icons, grouping icons, avoid accidental changes. A consistent, coherent way would be the "Bookshelf Approach":

- Special separators (SPLITERS) would now divide panel in SECTIONS

- Each section would have its own "gravity" or "orientation" - either left, right, center, or none (=just like today). Like Solution #1, but should be applied to a SECTION, not individual icons, so no need set individual icon properties (no micromanagement).

- Every icon within a section would automatically stack according to its section orientation. So if you delete an icon in the middle of a "left-oriented" section, all icons to the right of it would shift left. In a section with no orientation, icons wouldnt shift.

- To arrange the icons, solution #9 is perfect. No need of lock / unlock. A key combination like the proposed ALT+mouse drag would prevent accidental moving while clicking. You could drag icons to different sections as well.

- Besides ALT+drag for 1-item movement, CTRL+ALT+drag could be used to move all icons in a section (useful for re-arranging groups, as #18 suggests).*

This brainstorm has so many ideas because we are trying to address several issues in 1 solution: avoid icon micro-management, ordering icons, grouping icons, avoid accidental changes. A consistent, coherent way would be the "Bookshelf Approach": - Special separators (SPLITERS) would now divide panel in SECTIONS - Each section would have its own "gravity" or "orientation" - either left, right, center, or none (=just like today). Like Solution #1, but should be applied to a SECTION, not individual icons, so no need set individual icon properties (no micromanagement). - Every icon within a section would automatically stack according to its section orientation. So if you delete an icon in the middle of a "left-oriented" section, all icons to the right of it would shift left. In a section with no orientation, icons wouldnt shift. - To arrange the icons, solution #9 is perfect. No need of lock / unlock. A key combination like the proposed ALT+mouse drag would prevent accidental moving while clicking. You could drag icons to different sections as well. - Besides ALT+drag for 1-item movement, CTRL+ALT+drag could be used to move all icons in a section (useful for re-arranging groups, as #18 suggests).* - The Splitters could be moved this way too, to set the width of each section - Right clicking ANY icon would allow to set its panel and section settings: simply add a "Panel > " and "Section > " item to their context menus. No need to hunt down a blank area of the panel anymore, no need to increase section width just to have a blank area to set its properties. - Splitters would have 3 context menus added: "Panel >", "Left Section > ", "Right Section >". - Besides the separators we have today, we could also have "SPACERS" to create invisible spaces between icons we want (like suggested in #8). If the user presses ALT while the mouse is over the panel, the spacers become visible (otherwise would be difficult to find and move them) - If you delete a splitter, a popup would ask if the newly merged section would inherit the properties of the right or of the left section. * The ALT and CTRL+ALT is just a suggestion, actual keys would be what gnome developers find most consistent with current interface. Summing it up, no need of lock/unlock, no need to micromanage icons, no need to hunt blank areas to set up options. And, IMHO, highly friendly and intuitive while still fully customizable.

Written by panta1978 the 22 Jun 09 at 21:30.

Allow multiple icons selection, simply by clicking with the mouse's left button and selecting the desired area.

Allow multiple icons selection, simply by clicking with the mouse's left button and selecting the desired area.

Written by xubaj the 26 Aug 09 at 22:31.

just like #11 but with an [Alt] key which prevents accidental rearrangment. by right-clicking the selected icons you can apply multiple preferences (lock/unlock/remove etc.) at once.

just like #11 but with an [Alt] key which prevents accidental rearrangment. by right-clicking the selected icons you can apply multiple preferences (lock/unlock/remove etc.) at once.

Written by pixxel the 8 Mar 08 at 10:20.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #3853 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #3853 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by choad the 20 Jan 09 at 21:08.

a dialogue should pop up similar to that of windows vista, asking if you want to

* keep existing display setup
* use both displays (duplicating the output at the highest common resolution)
* use both displays (side by side configuration)
* use only the external display (max resolution)

a dialogue should pop up similar to that of windows vista, asking if you want to * keep existing display setup * use both displays (duplicating the output at the highest common resolution) * use both displays (side by side configuration) * use only the external display (max resolution)

Written by tdomhan the 25 Jan 09 at 14:14.

-give gnome some love concerning multihead bugs. (e.g. programs opening on the wrong monitor)
-make the setup of an multihead environment dead easy, through the ubuntu configuration
-switching back and forth between single head and multihead should be flawless, especially for notebook users, e.g. when using the laptop monitor alone you should not have 4 gnome panels only because you used 2 on each monitor in an multihead setup

-give gnome some love concerning multihead bugs. (e.g. programs opening on the wrong monitor) -make the setup of an multihead environment dead easy, through the ubuntu configuration -switching back and forth between single head and multihead should be flawless, especially for notebook users, e.g. when using the laptop monitor alone you should not have 4 gnome panels only because you used 2 on each monitor in an multihead setup

Written by aay the 20 Mar 09 at 10:43.

Rationale: Having to reconfigure an external monitor (especially when it is the same monitor) every time it is connected is a productivity killer.

Proposed Solution: Implement some kind of monitor profile manager which remembers recently connected monitors and automatically applies the settings which were last used with those monitors.

Usage Example:

Christian takes his laptop between home and work. At each location he connects an external monitor to his laptop. Whenever he connects one of these monitors, the Ubuntu (or Gnome or whatever) monitor profile manager recognizes the monitor as one which he has recently used and applies the resolution settings which were last used.

Rationale: Having to reconfigure an external monitor (especially when it is the same monitor) every time it is connected is a productivity killer. Proposed Solution: Implement some kind of monitor profile manager which remembers recently connected monitors and automatically applies the settings which were last used with those monitors. Usage Example: Christian takes his laptop between home and work. At each location he connects an external monitor to his laptop. Whenever he connects one of these monitors, the Ubuntu (or Gnome or whatever) monitor profile manager recognizes the monitor as one which he has recently used and applies the resolution settings which were last used.

Written by Aloka the 13 May 09 at 21:44.

In addition to Solution #1, if "use both displays (side by side configuration)" is picked, the two displays should be combined into a non-rectangular desktop. This happens in windows, and i think it should be there in ubuntu as well.

Currently, the two screens are combined into a rectangle. But, if one screen is a different resolution than the other, you get strange behaviour like being able to move your mouse above or below the smaller resolution screen. This is not ideal.

In addition to Solution #1, if "use both displays (side by side configuration)" is picked, the two displays should be combined into a non-rectangular desktop. This happens in windows, and i think it should be there in ubuntu as well. Currently, the two screens are combined into a rectangle. But, if one screen is a different resolution than the other, you get strange behaviour like being able to move your mouse above or below the smaller resolution screen. This is not ideal.

Written by cherva the 22 Sep 09 at 20:54.

Work together with the X,Nvidia and Ati developers to implement the needing components in the X itself and in the Nvidia/Ati binary and open source drivers. So no need for logging in and out is necessary.

Work together with the X,Nvidia and Ati developers to implement the needing components in the X itself and in the Nvidia/Ati binary and open source drivers. So no need for logging in and out is necessary.

Written by aufather the 9 Nov 08 at 04:07.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #15427 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #15427 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by dcruz the 28 Apr 09 at 10:47.

The dialog should contain collapsed additional information from both files that the user could access, such as:
* size
* creation date
* modification date
* creator
* etc.

The dialog should contain collapsed additional information from both files that the user could access, such as: * size * creation date * modification date * creator * etc.

Written by dcruz the 28 Apr 09 at 10:48.

Have an option the see the difference between both files it those files are textual.

Have an option the see the difference between both files it those files are textual.

Written by Lachu the 28 Apr 09 at 13:08.

GNOME should have option, like in KDE to write file in destination folder, but changes the name. When file should be named "SomeDocument", we should name it "SomeDocument-CurrentDate" or "SomeDocument-SourceFolderName".

GNOME should have option, like in KDE to write file in destination folder, but changes the name. When file should be named "SomeDocument", we should name it "SomeDocument-CurrentDate" or "SomeDocument-SourceFolderName".

Written by Akerbos the 29 Apr 09 at 19:52.

Similar to #3, but rename the existing file (kind of backup style)
I'd like this because most often you want the new file to be in effect at that moment while preserving the old one.

Similar to #3, but rename the existing file (kind of backup style) I'd like this because most often you want the new file to be in effect at that moment while preserving the old one.

Written by sanketmedhi the 4 May 09 at 09:55.

There should also be an option for merging files/folders together just as in some other operating systems. This will be especially beneficial in case of folders.

There should also be an option for merging files/folders together just as in some other operating systems. This will be especially beneficial in case of folders.

Written by philip the 5 May 09 at 22:25.

The motivation is like #2 but for non-text files. If one or both files are images, office documents or media files, diff will not help. Clicking on the file name should open the file. This saves a visual search for the files in the directory.

The motivation is like #2 but for non-text files. If one or both files are images, office documents or media files, diff will not help. Clicking on the file name should open the file. This saves a visual search for the files in the directory.

Written by philip the 5 May 09 at 22:52.

The dialog should contain pre-computed views of the files, so you don't have to wait for (say) the spreadsheet program to load and open the files. The views should be about 100x100 pixels large and should show a cropped, scrollable view of each file. When the user resizes the dialog,, the preview areas should show more or less of the files. Or, a larger preview can show as a tool tip when the mouse hovers over the small preview.

The dialog should contain pre-computed views of the files, so you don't have to wait for (say) the spreadsheet program to load and open the files. The views should be about 100x100 pixels large and should show a cropped, scrollable view of each file. When the user resizes the dialog,, the preview areas should show more or less of the files. Or, a larger preview can show as a tool tip when the mouse hovers over the small preview.

Written by bgfeldm the 12 May 09 at 13:01.

add an option to move old file to the trash before overwrite.
nautulis:
move file to trash before overwrite, if file is a text or document file below a preconfigured size such as 1 MB.

This way overwritten files can be retrieved at a dept of one.
Or you could make the trash bin a temporary source repository for overwritten/deleted files, only storing the diff of the text files, so you limit space taken up by the trash bin and have multiple restore points for files. The repository will be clear every time the user clears the repository or after a defined amount of days.

add an option to move old file to the trash before overwrite. nautulis: move file to trash before overwrite, if file is a text or document file below a preconfigured size such as 1 MB. This way overwritten files can be retrieved at a dept of one. Or you could make the trash bin a temporary source repository for overwritten/deleted files, only storing the diff of the text files, so you limit space taken up by the trash bin and have multiple restore points for files. The repository will be clear every time the user clears the repository or after a defined amount of days.

Written by Matir the 26 May 09 at 03:19.

Since md5sum is necessary for parts of apt and is installed in every base system, only files with the same name and different checksums need to be considered.

Since md5sum is necessary for parts of apt and is installed in every base system, only files with the same name and different checksums need to be considered.

Written by Redge the 2 Jun 09 at 18:34.

See also solution #6. We now have a "Replace All" button, but I miss Windows Explorer's "Replace if Newer" option. Displaying extra info is all nice, but I want to be able to do file operations that don't require further user interaction. So let's add that "Replace All if Newer" button.

See also solution #6. We now have a "Replace All" button, but I miss Windows Explorer's "Replace if Newer" option. Displaying extra info is all nice, but I want to be able to do file operations that don't require further user interaction. So let's add that "Replace All if Newer" button.

Written by Redge the 8 Jun 09 at 00:07.

When doing file operations and Nautilus encounters conflicts or errors that require the user's feedback to resolve, Nautilus should first try to complete the rest of the queue and push the files needing feedback to the end. That way, if the user is AFK as much of the operation as possible will be done by the time he/she gets back.

When doing file operations and Nautilus encounters conflicts or errors that require the user's feedback to resolve, Nautilus should first try to complete the rest of the queue and push the files needing feedback to the end. That way, if the user is AFK as much of the operation as possible will be done by the time he/she gets back.

Written by Lachu the 19 Jun 09 at 08:47.

On situation in idea, Ubuntu should save file on different name and create Desktop file to it. Many user uses only GUI application with file managers supporting Desktop Files.

On situation in idea, Ubuntu should save file on different name and create Desktop file to it. Many user uses only GUI application with file managers supporting Desktop Files.

Written by korin43 the 18 Jun 09 at 20:58.

Decide on a on file size where it's faster to just check if it's an identical file than ask the user if they want to replace/skip. If the files with the same name are identical, we just skip them instead of presenting the replace/skip dialogue (since both options would have the same result).

Note: This would be a complete byte-for-byte comparison, not just a comparison of timestamps and name.

Here's the order that the system would check:
- Is there a file with the same name?
- Is it below the maximum size set to check? (we don't want to auto-check if it would be faster to ask the user. ex: 10 Gb file)
- Compare size
- Compare the two files (byte-for-byte), fail as soon as you find anything different (if the first byte of the new file is different, fail immediately instead of checking the whole file)

Note 2: Timestamps will not be compared. If the new file is identical with a different timestamp, the new timestamp should be applied.

Decide on a on file size where it's faster to just check if it's an identical file than ask the user if they want to replace/skip. If the files with the same name are identical, we just skip them instead of presenting the replace/skip dialogue (since both options would have the same result). Note: This would be a complete byte-for-byte comparison, not just a comparison of timestamps and name. Here's the order that the system would check: - Is there a file with the same name? - Is it below the maximum size set to check? (we don't want to auto-check if it would be faster to ask the user. ex: 10 Gb file) - Compare size - Compare the two files (byte-for-byte), fail as soon as you find anything different (if the first byte of the new file is different, fail immediately instead of checking the whole file) Note 2: Timestamps will not be compared. If the new file is identical with a different timestamp, the new timestamp should be applied.

Written by vegetarianshrimp the 19 Jun 09 at 19:03.

This gives the user the option to replace/skip if they already know whether the file is identical or not, or don't want to risk replacing an important file. But if they don't know if the files are identical, then they can press the auto button.

It would look something like this:

|Auto| |Auto all| |Replace| |Replace all| |Skip| |Skip all|

This gives the user the option to replace/skip if they already know whether the file is identical or not, or don't want to risk replacing an important file. But if they don't know if the files are identical, then they can press the auto button. It would look something like this: |Auto| |Auto all| |Replace| |Replace all| |Skip| |Skip all|

Written by Prime Mover the 2 Aug 09 at 21:50.

The dialog should attempt to show the differences between the files if they are in a recognizable format. For example, if the files are images, show both images, along with file size and date. This will allow the user to easily make a decision about whether to replace the file. The destination filename could also be an editable field to allow the user to change the name and have the copy continue under the new name. If the file were an audio file then it could display bitrate, sample rate, length, etc.

Here's an example dialog box from Directory Opus on Windows which demonstrates this:

The dialog should attempt to show the differences between the files if they are in a recognizable format. For example, if the files are images, show both images, along with file size and date. This will allow the user to easily make a decision about whether to replace the file. The destination filename could also be an editable field to allow the user to change the name and have the copy continue under the new name. If the file were an audio file then it could display bitrate, sample rate, length, etc. Here's an example dialog box from Directory Opus on Windows which demonstrates this: <img src="http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/4432/sreplacey.png">

Written by pgdx the 31 Jul 09 at 08:09.

The copying of the rest of the files should continue and the files in question should be queued until the user decides what to do with this.

The copying of the rest of the files should continue and the files in question should be queued until the user decides what to do with this.

Written by kazagistar the 4 Aug 09 at 02:32.

When you do a large transfer, it could try to calculate exactly what needs to be moved where first, so that the user does not have to sit there to make sure there are no conflicts.

When you do a large transfer, it could try to calculate exactly what needs to be moved where first, so that the user does not have to sit there to make sure there are no conflicts.

Written by pubsbin the 8 Aug 09 at 01:12.

There are some easy tests for checking if two files (in two different folders) are the same file. From the easy ones (metainformation, size, name), checking some positions (sampling) and, finally, comparing them entirely.

If Nautilus uses those easy equality checks, it could avoid copying equal files. Even if you compare the whole file, a read is faster than a write.

There are some easy tests for checking if two files (in two different folders) are the same file. From the easy ones (metainformation, size, name), checking some positions (sampling) and, finally, comparing them entirely. If Nautilus uses those easy equality checks, it could avoid copying equal files. Even if you compare the whole file, a read is faster than a write.

Written by don1500 the 12 Aug 09 at 20:20.

Most of the time I have this problem I run into it when moving music files. There is a "Yes to ALL" but no "No to All". All I want are the files that are on the source but not on the target. "Overwrite if Newer" is close and a good suggestion, but sometimes I don't want to overwrite the old file. Sometimes you want to overwrite the older version, and with "Yes to All" you still have that option. Maybe adding both "Overwrite if newer" AND "No to ALL" is the answer. I think this would be the easiest to implement. This is also the K.I.S.S. answer.

Most of the time I have this problem I run into it when moving music files. There is a "Yes to ALL" but no "No to All". All I want are the files that are on the source but not on the target. "Overwrite if Newer" is close and a good suggestion, but sometimes I don't want to overwrite the old file. Sometimes you want to overwrite the older version, and with "Yes to All" you still have that option. Maybe adding both "Overwrite if newer" AND "No to ALL" is the answer. I think this would be the easiest to implement. This is also the K.I.S.S. answer.

Written by Penguin Guy the 16 Aug 09 at 16:01.

Simple enough, instead of having 'Replace All' and 'Skip All' have a check box 'For All'.


Obviously, the actual thing would look a bit more professional than the one I made in Gimp.

Simple enough, instead of having 'Replace All' and 'Skip All' have a check box 'For All'. <img src="http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/1217030/Ubuntu%20Brainstorm/replace%3F.png"> Obviously, the actual thing would look a bit more professional than the one I made in Gimp.

Written by caleb the 21 Aug 09 at 08:54.

I have gotten into the bad habit of copying a file deleting the parent folder, and pasting it elsewhere. Ubuntu should warn when deleting a copied file's folder.

I have gotten into the bad habit of copying a file deleting the parent folder, and pasting it elsewhere. Ubuntu should warn when deleting a copied file's folder.

Written by Chronos the 29 Aug 09 at 14:46.

Create a more advanced "thread" based queuing system for file operations. Its possible to make it simple, no need to make it complex. Read below:

Seriously, in Total commander i used a lot the function to not just copy files at once and send the process in the background, but to push F2, and create a list of the operations where(!) the list is a queue. So the processes are not running at the same time to slow things down. We can even make this better. Imagine you have 4 drives. A B C and D. You want to copy 3x6 folders/files from A to B and vice versa. It takes long, so you start to copy/move/whatsoever to work on C and D (like before from C to D and vice versa). To make all these operations (4direction) run at the same time slows the computer slow down(no wonder why).

We could create two thread with two queues in this case.

In summary, A and B would process their queue, processing files the fast as possible, and separately C and D would do their things as well.

We could make it automatic maybe, that if we are making file operations to or from one partition/hardware, at default it would create a queue, what (with a push of a button) would appear from the already used window(dont know the name). This queue would make sure that only one operation is active at a time, making hardware sweat less, and operations faster.

Create a more advanced "thread" based queuing system for file operations. Its possible to make it simple, no need to make it complex. Read below: Seriously, in Total commander i used a lot the function to not just copy files at once and send the process in the background, but to push F2, and create a list of the operations where(!) the list is a queue. So the processes are not running at the same time to slow things down. We can even make this better. Imagine you have 4 drives. A B C and D. You want to copy 3x6 folders/files from A to B and vice versa. It takes long, so you start to copy/move/whatsoever to work on C and D (like before from C to D and vice versa). To make all these operations (4direction) run at the same time slows the computer slow down(no wonder why). We could create two thread with two queues in this case. In summary, A and B would process their queue, processing files the fast as possible, and separately C and D would do their things as well. We could make it automatic maybe, that if we are making file operations to or from one partition/hardware, at default it would create a queue, what (with a push of a button) would appear from the already used window(dont know the name). This queue would make sure that only one operation is active at a time, making hardware sweat less, and operations faster. Maybe i'll do a mockup if i have time. This is just an idea, we can modify it. Cheers, David

Written by yaknowwat the 16 Aug 09 at 09:07.

The list would list all the files that need conformation and let u handle them with check boxes. ( A Select All/None combo button and an Invert Selection button are a must for such a list. Then double clicking a listed directory should select all in the directory.)
Then by for example pressing Overwrite or a Do Nothing button the action would affect all selected files. After which you can continue such steps until the List is gone or the user exits.
I'd imagine this would be simple to do without over complicating things.
Also the number of dialogues could easily be reduced with this strategy.
This increases efficiency because a user could handle all the conformation files at once in their own way even as their still copying normal files.

The list would list all the files that need conformation and let u handle them with check boxes. ( A Select All/None combo button and an Invert Selection button are a must for such a list. Then double clicking a listed directory should select all in the directory.) Then by for example pressing Overwrite or a Do Nothing button the action would affect all selected files. After which you can continue such steps until the List is gone or the user exits. I'd imagine this would be simple to do without over complicating things. Also the number of dialogues could easily be reduced with this strategy. This increases efficiency because a user could handle all the conformation files at once in their own way even as their still copying normal files.

Written by a.shaferov the 24 Aug 09 at 08:15.

I propose to add a new key to .desktop-files.
Add WM_CLASS key and _make it required_.

P.S. Sorry for bad English.

I propose to add a new key to .desktop-files. Add WM_CLASS key and _make it required_. P.S. Sorry for bad English.

Written by rinia_iku the 24 Aug 09 at 14:52.

Showing the number of the online contacts and the total number of contacts for each group next to group title.
Like: "Friends (5/50)" or "Friends (5 of 50)"
meaning 5 of 50 contact are online on the group Friends.

Showing the number of the online contacts and the total number of contacts for each group next to group title. Like: "Friends (5/50)" or "Friends (5 of 50)" meaning 5 of 50 contact are online on the group Friends.

Written by krs the 30 Jun 08 at 08:06.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #10498 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #10498 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by Rook777 the 9 Apr 09 at 04:09.

This GUI could allow the user to change color, shape, transparency, placement, size. This could even be included in the appearance preferences.

This GUI could allow the user to change color, shape, transparency, placement, size. This could even be included in the appearance preferences.

Written by choad the 11 Apr 09 at 22:09.

why make another customizable option when it makes more sense to integrate it with the system theme?

why make another customizable option when it makes more sense to integrate it with the system theme?

Written by Seph_VII the 13 Apr 09 at 17:55.

Why not use the same kind of dialog we currently use for the Panels? It should be accessed through "System/Preferences/Notifications." We'd have a "General" tab with location and size options, and a "Background" tab with:

[o]None (Use system theme)

[o]Unicoloured
Color: [Box to choose color]

[o]Background image:
[Box to choose image]

Transparency: [Slider]
Blur: [Slider]

Why not use the same kind of dialog we currently use for the Panels? It should be accessed through "System/Preferences/Notifications." We'd have a "General" tab with location and size options, and a "Background" tab with: [o]None (Use system theme) [o]Unicoloured Color: [Box to choose color] [o]Background image: [Box to choose image] Transparency: [Slider] Blur: [Slider]

Written by JebusWankel the 27 Apr 09 at 05:11.

This prevents feature creep, but is still a gui. We don't want to add entries to menus like Preferences and Administration, because it makes Ubuntu look too complicated and the menus look too much like in KDE (no offense). We also don't want to encourage people to change it unless it bothers them. It's probably very easy to make the notifications ugly but hard to make them any more attractive.

This prevents feature creep, but is still a gui. We don't want to add entries to menus like Preferences and Administration, because it makes Ubuntu look too complicated and the menus look too much like in KDE (no offense). We also don't want to encourage people to change it unless it bothers them. It's probably very easy to make the notifications ugly but hard to make them any more attractive.

Written by Avantarius the 27 Apr 09 at 08:16.

Insert a new tab in the Appearance Preferences>Costumize dialog, this would be the most logical way.

Insert a new tab in the Appearance Preferences>Costumize dialog, this would be the most logical way.

Written by Dazed_75 the 28 Apr 09 at 16:12.

Too often notifications in the new scheme come up and then disappear before I've actually read them. Whichever scheme is used to set preferences for notifications I would like to see included:

- a minimum time for notification bubbles to be visible

- a check box to set that notification bubbles not disappear once the time has run out until there is user activity (keyboard, mouse, ???). Note that user activity before the timer runs out should NOT fade the notification as the user may be active as the notification appears.

Too often notifications in the new scheme come up and then disappear before I've actually read them. Whichever scheme is used to set preferences for notifications I would like to see included: - a minimum time for notification bubbles to be visible - a check box to set that notification bubbles not disappear once the time has run out until there is user activity (keyboard, mouse, ???). Note that user activity before the timer runs out should NOT fade the notification as the user may be active as the notification appears.

Written by babis79 the 8 May 08 at 10:29.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #8218 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #8218 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!

Written by granadajose the 12 Jun 08 at 06:54.

Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #9792 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution. Thanks!

<i>Ubuntu Brainstorm was updated in January 2009. Since the idea #9792 was submitted before this update, its rationale and solution are not separated. Please vote accordingly, and if you have the necessary rights, please separate the rationale from the solution.</i><br /> Thanks!