On Sat, Aug 24, 2019 at 1:43 AM David Aguilar <davvid@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I have a very strong opinion about the confirmation dialog, so I'll just > mention that here since Hannes is on this thread. > > In cola we do have a confirmation dialog, and I strongly believe this is > the correct behavior because it's an operation that drops data that > cannot be recovered. > > In the other thread, it was mentioned that this dialog would be a > nuisance. Perhaps that is true -- for the dialog that may have been > implemented in this series (I haven't run it to verify). > > Let's dive into that concern. > > In git-cola we have a confirmation dialog and it is by no way a > detriment to the workflow, and I use that feature all the time. > Why? The reason is that we focused on the keyboard interaction. > > The workflow is as follows: > > Ctrl-u to initiate the revert action > The prompt appears immediately. > - Hitting any of "enter", "y", or "spacebar" will > confirm the confirmation, and proceed. > - Hitting any of "escape" or "n" will cancel the action. > > So essentially the workflow for the power user becomes "ctrl-u, enter" > and that is such a tiny overhead that it really is not a bother at all. > > On the other hand, if I had to actually move my hand over to a mouse or > trackpad and actually "click" on something then I would be super > annoyed. That would be simply horrible with RSI in mind. > I take this as a point for*not* having a confirmation dialog when doing the action per mouse. Which matches exactly my original implementation. > OTOH having to hit "enter" or "spacebar" (which is the largest key on > your keyboard, and your thumbs have good hefty muscles) is totally > acceptable in my book because it strikes the right balance between > safety for a destructive operation and convenience. > > Now, let's consider the alternative -- adding an option to disable the > prompt. I don't like that. > > Why? It's yet another option. It's yet another thing to document, yet > another code path, and yet another pitfall for a user who might run > git-gui in a different configuration (and becomes surprised when revert > doesn't prompt and suddenly loses their work). > > Do we really need an option, or do we need better usability instead? > My opinion is that the latter is the real need. > > > That's my $.02 from having used this feature in practice since 2013. 2012 Best, Bert > -- > David
