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 750832 - Improve search options UI
Improve search options UI
Status: RESOLVED OBSOLETE
Product: nautilus
Classification: Core
Component: general
unspecified
Other Linux
: Normal enhancement
: ---
Assigned To: Nautilus Maintainers
Nautilus Maintainers
: 774127 (view as bug list)
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2015-06-12 09:24 UTC by Carlos Soriano
Modified: 2016-11-29 14:51 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---



Description Carlos Soriano 2015-06-12 09:24:47 UTC
We will allow new options like "search on subfolders" that will hopefully replace the use case of "type-ahead" and it will allow fine grained search by time bounds, etc.

Some firsts drafts are here https://raw.githubusercontent.com/gnome-design-team/gnome-mockups/master/nautilus/nautilus-next/search-options.png

We cannot do the popover with a headerbar like that, given how headerbar works the border wont match the popover border. So we will have to look for a different solution in case we agree on that mockup.
Comment 2 Javi 2015-10-28 23:16:27 UTC
Would be great to apply the same concepts applied on thunderbird, to the file manager.

For see what I am talking, see:
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/global-search
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/quick-filter-toolbar

It would add:

* Calendar view about your file search
* Add constrains to your search (filters)

Translating "find" parameters (-user, -group, -maxdepth, -mtime, -newer, -mount, -iregex, -size, -perm, ...), to UI would be nice

Thank you !!
Comment 3 Alexandre Franke 2016-11-29 13:04:06 UTC
*** Bug 774127 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 4 Carlos Soriano 2016-11-29 13:07:33 UTC
This was implemented already (although not fully complete) for 3.20, closing as obsolete
Comment 5 Alexandre Franke 2016-11-29 14:19:45 UTC
(In reply to Carlos Soriano from comment #4)
> (although not fully complete)

Why not keep it open then? The switch for recursive search for instance is still missing in 3.22.
Comment 6 Carlos Soriano 2016-11-29 14:42:49 UTC
(In reply to Alexandre Franke from comment #5)
> (In reply to Carlos Soriano from comment #4)
> > (although not fully complete)
> 
> Why not keep it open then? The switch for recursive search for instance is
> still missing in 3.22.

That is on pourpose, we moved it to preferences.

Regarding it's not completed yet, you are right, it's missing text search, etc. should we keep it open then?
Comment 7 Alexandre Franke 2016-11-29 14:51:40 UTC
(In reply to Carlos Soriano from comment #6)
> That is on pourpose, we moved it to preferences.

I guess we should reopen the bug I marked as duplicate then. Someone was asking for a way to do one shot recursive searches when the preference is set to no.

> Regarding it's not completed yet, you are right, it's missing text search,
> etc. should we keep it open then?

Well a report should only be closed once it's not relevant anymore. If you still have work to do on this, the report should be kept open until you're done.