Bo Siltberg schreef op 01-06-2016 21:44:
Then try 5.0 if you need extensive undo, or simply try to find another
way
of writing that does not rely in too much undo. It is clearly not meant
for
reverting some hour of work.
Why don't you try to stop people from doing what they want in their
private time? Oh, you are already doing so.
And maybe you should also try to determine what a feature, that has
existed for many years now in many software solutions, in a much greater
design and extent, I might add, why don't you try to determine what that
feature is meant to be used for, at your sole behest, irrespective of
what real people actually want?
Oh, I know you do. What if, if that feature actually had any sane
implementation like most applications do have, and which should form at
least an example of how it should work, what if that feature did allow
or would allow someone to revert hours of work? Would that be a problem
to you?
Would it be a problem to you if people actually used it for that? Or is
it only a problem that either (a) it means the current system is not
really all that great or (b) someone would need to be in agreement with
that idea?
I mean in both cases, if there actually was some support for the
feature, people might implement it, and you might be wrong about your
assumptions. Which I guess, is something you don't want to be all that
often. But regardless, it would probably make everyone a lot happier,
even though you can perhaps not readily imagine that.
Those 100 undo steps we have today are single character undos. If
someone makes more changes, they might amount to 50 characters of
backdraft. 50 characters of history. It might not be more than a single
line (or sentence).
How can you seriously consider that to be any good?
"Should be fine for most people" as the other person says, is just not
reality.
Only if your operations are actually block-level operations, does it
make any real sense.
Or if you only want to undo stuff within the space of a minute.
See the undo system already saves entire blocks. It just needs to be
augmented for that to also happen, in condensation, for character-level
operations, you see.
And most applications have that.
Most actually do.
You are really in the minority here, what that goes, and LibreOffice
users themselves are also, in the minority, themselves. Whether you want
that or not, and whether you like that or not, as well.
So using the claim of "large user base" or "great experience" as an
argument here is really void. "Millions of people are using it and not
finding fault". Really, did you ask them.
Did you hold a poll over millions of users over this issue?
Those insignificant beings, did you inquire into their opinions?
Some projects do. NetworkManager recently did, and it was great that
they did. They took it very seriously.
I think many projects do not.
Anyway I am writing this with a foot that is about twice its regular
size, and I think I need to quit it now.
Regards.
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscribe@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.