In shortcut view, trash is located under home and above home's child folders, while in tree view, it is located below the child folders. I propose that trash be moved to the bottom of the places. For comparison of shortcuts view in other file managers. Caja: Bottom of Places Nemo: Bottom of Places Nautilus: Bottom of Places Dolphin: Bottom of Places PCManFM: 3rd position of 4 entries under places ( home, Desktop, Trash, Applications ) PCMan-Qt: 3rd position of 6 entries under places ( home, Desktop, Trash, Computer, Applications, Network )
(In reply to Jay Philips from comment #0) > In shortcut view, trash is located under home and above home's child > folders, while in tree view, it is located below the child folders. With "home's child folders" you refer to "Pictures, Downloads and Documents" ? I dont have these as root elements in the tree view. So I am not sure what you mean with "below the child folders" in tree-view. Can I make these folders appear in tree-view ? Or do you refer to an opened "home" directory ? I think your list is lacking some details: Caja: Bottom of fixed Places - re-arrangable bookmarks are below Nemo: Button of Places, even below the re-arrangable bookmarks Nautilus: Bottom of fixed Places - re-arrangable bookmarks are below Thunar: Bottom of fixed Places - re-arrangable bookmarks are below Dolphin: In the middle of Places .. new bookmarks will be created below (though you can re-arrange all places) PCManFM: Bottom of fixed Places (if you count the others as "devices") - re-arrangable bookmarks are below So it seems to be "common sense" that trash is located on the button of places, but above the bookmarks (Only nemo seems to handle that in a different way) iirc, your patch from Bug #11586 would resample nemo, by moving trash below the bookmarks .. I actually would say we are currently more "standard-conform". imo a improvement could be to be able to re-arrange places and mix them with bookmarks, like in dolphin. ... though that probably would be alot of work for a small gain.
(In reply to alexxcons from comment #1) > With "home's child folders" you refer to "Pictures, Downloads and Documents" > ? I dont have these as root elements in the tree view. So I am not sure > what you mean with "below the child folders" in tree-view. Can I make these > folders appear in tree-view ? Or do you refer to an opened "home" directory ? Yes that is what I was referring to, when Home is opened. > I think your list is lacking some details: Yes I wasnt considering the rearrangement option, as I was focused on the default arrangement. > Caja: Bottom of fixed Places - re-arrangable bookmarks are below > Nemo: Button of Places, even below the re-arrangable bookmarks > Nautilus: Bottom of fixed Places - re-arrangable bookmarks are below > Thunar: Bottom of fixed Places - re-arrangable bookmarks are below > Dolphin: In the middle of Places .. new bookmarks will be created below > (though you can re-arrange all places) > PCManFM: Bottom of fixed Places (if you count the others as "devices") - > re-arrangable bookmarks are below Lets have the details even more detailed. 1. Caja, Nemo, Nautilus (including file dialogs), PCManFM have a separate group for Bookmarks. 2. Caja and Nautilus include the home child folders as part of the Places group and do not allow their rearrangement. 3. Nemo, Dolphin, Thunar and PCManFM treat home's child folders similar to bookmarks and allow them to be rearranged, irrespective if they are part of the Places group or the Bookmarks group. 4. Caja, Nemo, Nautilus, and Dolphin, PCManFM put Trash at or close to the bottom of Places group (atleast initially), irrespective of whether entries in the group can be rearranged. > So it seems to be "common sense" that trash is located on the button of > places, but above the bookmarks > (Only nemo seems to handle that in a different way) Nemo doesn't handle it in a different way, which also includes Dolphin, it just treats home's child folders similar to bookmarks, in that they can be rearranged. > iirc, your patch from Bug #11586 would resample nemo, by moving trash below > the bookmarks .. I actually would say we are currently more > "standard-conform". Yes it would most resemble Nemo regarding Trash, as Nemo allows rearrangement of home's child folders, which are located above it. Well actually we arent really standard-conformant, as shown in point 4 above that all other file managers put Trash at the bottom of Places group. > imo a improvement could be to be able to re-arrange places and mix them with > bookmarks, like in dolphin. ... though that probably would be alot of work > for a small gain. Going to dolphin's level is overkill and we have to set some things to be customizable by the user and other things not to be. imo, having home's child folders rearrangeable isnt good, as it breaks the placement of those folders in tree view and in the file dialogs. Having a separate group for bookmarks is also imo a good thing, so people are aware of this feature, and likely would be more aware of it if we had a bookmarks menu item.
(In reply to Jay Philips from comment #2) > Going to dolphin's level is overkill Why ? > and we have to set some things to be > customizable by the user and other things not to be. Why you think so ? xfce is known to be very customizable .. why you want to force items ? > imo, having home's > child folders rearrangeable isnt good, as it breaks the placement of those > folders in tree view and in the file dialogs. Why not letting the user decide if he/she wants to have the same order as there ?
(In reply to alexxcons from comment #3) > Why ? As you already said in comment 1, "... that probably would be alot of work for a small gain." and also it wouldn't translate to the unified UI when the file dialogs don't also show this same order. > Why you think so ? xfce is known to be very customizable .. why you want to > force items ? Consistency of the UI is an important thing to have so that users have a cohesive UX. Thats why themes make the look of ever window and dialog the same and why we dont have separate behaviours when we interact with windows when set by the window manager. > Why not letting the user decide if he/she wants to have the same order as > there ? Not sure what else I can say than what has already been said above.
(In reply to Jay Philips from comment #4) > (In reply to alexxcons from comment #3) > As you already said in comment 1, "... that probably would be alot of work > for a small gain." and also it wouldn't translate to the unified UI when the > file dialogs don't also show this same order. 'overkill' sounded like a superfluous feature ... that it is some work for a relatively small gain IMO is ok to be worked on, if the feature is broadly accepted. I will close it as wontfix for now, since it looks like we will not get an agreement. If you can find more devs voting for that change, we can re-open the discussion.