After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 495875 - right-click menu reordering
right-click menu reordering
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: evolution
Classification: Applications
Component: general
2.22.x (obsolete)
Other Linux
: Normal enhancement
: ---
Assigned To: Evolution Shell Maintainers Team
Evolution QA team
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2007-11-11 14:23 UTC by Gilles Dartiguelongue
Modified: 2013-09-13 00:59 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: 2.19/2.20


Attachments
evolution-right-click-menu.patch (12.31 KB, patch)
2007-11-11 14:25 UTC, Gilles Dartiguelongue
committed Details | Review

Description Gilles Dartiguelongue 2007-11-11 14:23:53 UTC
Currently the right click menu of every component looks different even though there is a lot of common elements. It doesn't feel right.

To follow a "draft" patch to fix items of most plugins I could test (not exchange or groupwise unfortunately)

I also have to get back the paper where I wrote down the ordering logic.
Comment 1 Gilles Dartiguelongue 2007-11-11 14:25:16 UTC
Created attachment 98913 [details] [review]
evolution-right-click-menu.patch

addressbook/ChangeLog                                                  |    5 +
addressbook/gui/component/addressbook-view.c                           |   12 ++--
calendar/ChangeLog                                                     |    7 ++
calendar/gui/calendar-component.c                                      |    6 +-
calendar/gui/memos-component.c                                         |    6 +-
calendar/gui/tasks-component.c                                         |    6 +-
mail/ChangeLog                                                         |    5 +
mail/em-folder-tree.c                                                  |   27 +++++-----
plugins/folder-unsubscribe/ChangeLog                                   |    5 +
plugins/folder-unsubscribe/org-gnome-mail-folder-unsubscribe.eplug.xml |    2 
plugins/mail-account-disable/ChangeLog                                 |    5 +
plugins/mail-account-disable/mail-account-disable.c                    |    4 -
plugins/mark-all-read/ChangeLog                                        |    5 +
plugins/mark-all-read/org-gnome-mark-all-read.eplug.xml                |    2 
 14 files changed, 73 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)

thanks for considering.
Comment 2 Milan Crha 2007-11-13 15:51:20 UTC
I like the idea and patch seems to working fine, just add bug reference to ChangeLogs and commit to trunk.

I only have one question, what do you think about unification of action numbers? Like: 
"10." for New...
"20." for Move and Copy items
"30." for Save...
"40." for Delete...
"99." for Properties?
Or maybe 20 between each item type? You know, regardless of component, same type of event will have same number. Does it sound good?
Comment 3 Gilles Dartiguelongue 2007-11-13 22:46:25 UTC
ok based on the right-click left panel menu only, and trying to minimize the changes wrt to the current numbers:

10. New
11. Open ?
11->13 possibly new related items
14. Save
15. Copy
16. Move
17->29 err what else ?

30 - bar
30. Delete
31->39(other delete related items, in the sense of removing, destroying, erasing and the like, not recover for example)

40 - optional bar (to help reduce targeting problems)
41 -> 90 various items of the current component

99 - bar
99. properties

following this logic could also help sorting "in-component" menus.
Those could also benefit from a little stripping as some items in them might seem redundant (copy/cut/past for example) or the list just overly long.
Comment 4 Milan Crha 2007-11-14 09:54:18 UTC
a) I'm not sure if it's good idea to have them so close (10-20), when someone will need to place there more than one item and do not want to dig names (or relay on names), then it will be better to have a hole between numbers, I think.

b) Why did you create a hole between Open and Save? I usually see something like New/Open/(Close?)/Save/Save as/... (I know, it's against my a), but I hope you know what I mean.)

Otherwise sounds good to me, go a head ;)
Comment 5 Gilles Dartiguelongue 2007-11-18 11:23:33 UTC
for a and b: "and trying to minimize the changes wrt to the current numbers"

so I don't have to scan all bits of evolution to check if something is misplaced at this stage. I'll throw a pointer at this bug on the mailing list to get more comments and eventually create a page on the wiki for reference.

commited at revision 34548, closing.