-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Saturday 28 June 2003 13:31, David Hugh-Jones wrote:
> On Sat, 2003-06-28 at 09:28, Luis Pedro Coelho wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Please, don't do this. Sometimes I want to delete, sometimes I want to
> > move to trash.s
>
> Can I ask what the underlying need is?
>
> For remote files, you don't always want to move them into your trash -
> e.g. a 1G file over a slow connection. _Mostly_ I would think people
> want to delete remote files. Partly for connection reasons, partly
> because a file in your trash that was once "on some host somewhere" has
> probably lost all context that would explain where to put it back.
>
> What about "delete" vs "move to trash" on local filesystems? What makes
> you sometimes want to delete something rather than move it to the trash
> for deletion later? I'm not being rhetorical.
>
> > > Remote files will be deleted without moving to the trash, even if move
> > > to trash is selected.
> >
> > Don't do this either. IIRC, MS-Windows does the same and I found it a
> > horrible thing (I haven't used it in years, so I can't be sure it still
> > does so).
> >
> > Remote file handling is a problem, yes, but just making automatic deletes
> > when I want to move to trash is not the solution. "Do what I want not
> > what you think I mean".
> > Already fish seems to disallow a move-to-trash, which gets on my nerves
> > already: especially if I am fishing to a server across the same building
> > where the bandwidth is actually limited by the speed of my disk drive.
>
> Hmm.
>
> I hate adding configuration options, but:
>
> (o) Move all files to trash
> ( ) Move local files to trash, delete remote files
> ( ) Delete all files
>
> [x] Ask for confirmation
>
> > I think you mean your patch. Right now, I just enabled confirmations for
> > Delete (while keeping Trash unconfirmed) and I do get a confirmation-box
> > with Shift+DEL and none with DEL. If you change this behaviour it could
> > be considered a regression.
>
> I agree. Essentially: DEL does the default action, and has the default
> confirmation. Shift+DEL will "always delete", and will force
> confirmation unless the default action is delete anyway.

Sounds good.

> > Overall, I must say I am against it. My suggestion: get rid of "Shred."
> > It's a broken concept and very few people understand what it means. And
> > those will probably understand it doesn't give you any reassurances.
> > It's a bad idea.
>
> If shred doesn't actually guarantee that your files are killed, then we
> should ditch it - but I didn't know that. I would be fairly keen to get
> rid of shred, I think it is more a job for a specialized app than a
> general file manager.
>
> Now if we did get rid of shred then Ctrl+DEL would be available for
> "force move to trash" :-) Again, this would usually force confirmation
> (in case you're doing it for a huge remote file).

Shred is currently only available from the edit menu and has "ctrl-shift-del" 
as shortcut (at least here). That doesn't interfere, does it? I wouldn't miss 
the option though.

> One issue: do we have a valid way of distinguishing "local files" from
> remote files (that doesn't break on strange ioslaves)?

That depends how you define "local file" :)

Cheers,
Waldo
- -- 
bastian@kde.org -=|[ SuSE, The Linux Desktop Experts ]|=- bastian@suse.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE+/ZW9N4pvrENfboIRAtN2AJ0fPN0XXGH/I2ydJgdA1BozRp9LuwCgqK77
uRiLF0l5SDU2xgr6VVxtoXI=
=IMuQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----