On 15/09/19 01:57AM, David wrote: > On Sat, 14 Sep 2019 at 08:07, Marc Branchaud <marcnarc@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 2019-09-13 10:32 a.m., Pratyush Yadav wrote: > > > On 13/09/19 12:24PM, Allan Ford wrote: > > > >> Not a bug, but a suggestion consideration for “Git Gui” > > > >> Can a double click on the file name in the “unstaged” area move the > > >> item to “staged changes” .. (rather than having to click on the small > > >> icon to the left of the file name?) > > > > It has been something on my radar for some time. Shouldn't be something > > > too difficult to do. > > > > While I like the idea in general, I have a question that I'd like to ask > > > other git-gui users: > > Thank you for asking. > > > I've always felt this was a bit of user-experience failure on git-gui's > > part. Single-click should not behave differently just because you click > > the icon. > > > I've seen many new git-gui users find this (mildly) confusing. > > I acknowledge that consistency is an important aspect of GUI design. > Particularly for new and/or low-competency users. But surely > efficiency must also be valued too. Repetitive strain injury is not > nice. I have some days where I have hundreds or possibly even > thousands of such single clicksto stage and unstage items. Currently > it is possible to review and accumulate them efficiently due to how > that pane responds. > > And this seems a very small aspect to learn. if a person is so > "confused" by such a small thing to learn, I wonder what hope they > would have to comprehend git itself. > > > I'd be happy if the click behavior was consistent across the entire > > row: single-click to select, > > double-click to stage/unstage > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Please, no. > > I can't say it strongly enough. Please do not change stage/unstage > to require double-click. This would be most unwelcome here, unless it > comes with a configuration option to preserve the old behaviour. > > Maybe the actual problem is that the present icon (perhaps surprisingly) > has the behaviour of a blank check-box that relocates. I don't wish for > any change, but if the desire for change is irresistable then the > simplest solution is for the icon (that appears to the left of filenames > in the unstaged pane) to be replaced with blank check box that > behaves exactly as the current icon does. That is: > When clicked, it becomes a checked-box alongside the filename in > the staged area. And if that staged-checked-box is clicked, it reverts to > an unchecked-box (instead of the icon) in the unstaged pane. Hmm, I like this idea. But right now the icons also show the state of the file (modified, added, etc.), so if you switch them to a checkbox you lose that information. Are you and other people willing to lose that information. Though I've personally never been a huge fan of those icons. They never really managed to convey too much meaning to me. So I won't mind changing them to something like the single-letter git-status status flags. This also gives us a bit of consistency with git-status's flags, so people used to the command line will recognize them instantly. Thoughts? -- Regards, Pratyush Yadav
