On Tuesday 02 December 2014 17:52:48 Darshit Shah wrote: > On 11/27, Darshit Shah wrote: > >A couple of days ago, Giuseppe suggested (on IRC) that maybe we should > >reverse the direction in which the filename in the progressbar > >scrolls. > > > >His reasoning was that the last part of the file is the most important > >for most people / use cases. This use case is recursive retrieval > >where once you're a couple levels deep, actually knowing the filename > >could be difficult with the current scrolling mechanism. > > > >I've attached a patch which reverses the direction of the scrolling. > >The patch is currently only a proof of concept and will be changed and > >cleaned for the final version. However, I'd like everyone's views on > >the direction of scrolling and how it looks reversed. I believe that > >after reversing it, the progress bar may be more useful in a recursive > >retrieval, but looks a lot worse. > > > >My suggestion is to add another option to the --progress=bar switch, > >something like this: > >--progress-bar:rtol and --progress=bar:ltor for switching between the > >two scrolling styles, with rtol (Right to Left) being the default. > > Any updates / suggestions / reviews on this topic?
Hi Darshit,
currently with -r I see something like this
...
Saving to: ‘www.hostname.d.de/lkdfsldkflsdf/subdir/xxx/file-to-save’
www.hostname.d.de/lkdfsldkflsdf/subdir/xxx/file- [ <=>
] 77.81K --.-KB/s in 0.1s
My personal favor would be
1. IMHO, for single-threaded downloads we don't need the filename in the 'bar'
line at all.
2. but if a user wants it: just print the filename into the 'bar' line (I can
read the 'Saving to:' line pretty well).
3. if the plain filename name is too long, I would like to see the beginning
and the and with ... in between without scrollling.
Tim
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
