Closed Bug 192471 Opened 22 years ago Closed 19 years ago

local file listings need improvement

Categories

(Core :: Networking: File, enhancement)

Product:
Core
Component:
Networking: File
Type:
enhancement
Priority:
Not set
Severity:
normal

Tracking

()

Status:
RESOLVED EXPIRED

People

(Reporter: calvin, Assigned: dougt)

References

(Blocks 1 open bug)

Details

User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212 Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.3a) Gecko/20021212 The display for directory listings is lacking very much. Mozilla has a powerful GUI and that should be exploited to its fullest. Displaying of a directory listing should be a multi-column, sortable display. Columns should exist for filename, size, perhaps type, dates, etc. Also, directories should (perhaps optionally?) be seperated from the files, by giving them ordering preference over files. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3.
Can you please enter steps of reproduction.
Calvin: You mean something like Edit > Preferences > Debug > Networking > "Directory listing format: XUL (tree-based)"?
Not file handling.
Assignee: law → dougt
Component: File Handling → Networking: File
QA Contact: petersen → benc
I have a few comments then in reply: Why is this option in Debug->Networking? Why does it not apply to local directory listings? What about the ordering of directories and files? (Directories should appear above files)
To answer your first q: I think they're still working on it, and some ppl prefer the current way of displaying directories. Dunno bout the other 2 questions.
These days a professional quality browser is expected to handle file management, as well as show web sites. That is the context I'm filing this bug report, to clear up my viewpoint. There doesn't seem to even be an option for local directory listings as XUL trees. That should be an option, with trees as default. And then a sidebar tab should be created to list directory structure, but thats another thing for another time.
Blocks: 59932
please change the summary so is describes one or two of the major changes you would like. the default html view was generally better liked, and works better than the XUL/tree style, which has most of the features you want. XUL used to be the default, but we switched somwhere after Mozilla 1.0, as I recall. Please switch to XUL, and describe what you improvements you think are needed. If other browsers besides IE have file management features, that would be good to know. I don't think the fact IE has file management is necessarily a good reason for us to try to gain feature parity in that area.
I strongly believe that local file listings should be XUL, it would make more sense for most users. Also, the directories need priority over files in ordering, so that they appear at the top of a listing.
Summary: file listing display is very badly designed → local file listings need improvement
I would prefer it to look like it has looked at least since NS4, I prefer the HTML version. the xul version was ugly as well as buggy.
Can anyone give any reasons to use the HTML view? There are several good reasons for using the XUL file listing, such as being about to order the files in various manners and thus find particular items faster.
> Can anyone give any reasons to use the HTML view? 1) It's not buggy (drag/drop from it works, clicking on things works, etc) 2) It acts like users expect it to (middle-click, single-click, modifier-click, selection, etc all work as expected). Those are the primary reasons. If someone were to fix the XUL view to not be totally broken, it could be considered a viable option againa.
Well, this bug report is about improving the file listing, so that includes improving anything wrong with the XUL layout. but how can the XUL layout be tested and improved when it isnt even an option? Three things need to happen: 1) XUL directory listing for local filesystems needs to be an option 2) the XUL listing needs improved 3) the XUL listing needs to be default On a side note, I've found a related bug where local directory listings are in XUL (which I like, but its wrong since its not suppost to be supported). Will be posted seperate bug if not already present.
Actually, item #0 on that list is: 0) Someone needs to be found who has time to work on the XUL listing. Bradley worked on it for a while, but he has no time to do that now. He may also be able to summarize the technical issues that need resolution better....
well, i say itd be 1.5, cause first we need to see it to work on it. if thats done, i will find someone to improve it or do it myself even if it means teaching myself XUL.
You can already enable it if you want to work on it. The pref still works there's just no UI for it.
This is an automated message, with ID "auto-resolve01". This bug has had no comments for a long time. Statistically, we have found that bug reports that have not been confirmed by a second user after three months are highly unlikely to be the source of a fix to the code. While your input is very important to us, our resources are limited and so we are asking for your help in focussing our efforts. If you can still reproduce this problem in the latest version of the product (see below for how to obtain a copy) or, for feature requests, if it's not present in the latest version and you still believe we should implement it, please visit the URL of this bug (given at the top of this mail) and add a comment to that effect, giving more reproduction information if you have it. If it is not a problem any longer, you need take no action. If this bug is not changed in any way in the next two weeks, it will be automatically resolved. Thank you for your help in this matter. The latest beta releases can be obtained from: Firefox: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox/ Thunderbird: http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/releases/1.5beta1.html Seamonkey: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/
This bug has been automatically resolved after a period of inactivity (see above comment). If anyone thinks this is incorrect, they should feel free to reopen it.
Status: UNCONFIRMED → RESOLVED
Closed: 19 years ago
Resolution: --- → EXPIRED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.