At Tue, 07 Dec 2010 21:22:26 +0000, Philip Jackson wrote: > > Hi Samuel, > > At Fri, 3 Dec 2010 08:29:48 -0700, > Samuel Wales wrote: > > > The options so far are 1. current design 2. current design tweaked so > > that double taps are more frequent operations 3. single taps for > > frequent operations and c-u for menus -- user gets to set which > > operation is bound to single taps 4. single taps for frequent > > operations and uppercase for menus -- user gets to set which > > operations are bound to single taps for each command. > > I like 2 or 3 best. I'm leaning towards 2 having used it for a few > days now. > > A friend of mine (hardcore techie, admittedly) used 0.8.2 which was > pre-groups and said he missed them awfully. > > > In principle we could let the user choose, say, 2 and 4. (My > > favorite is 4.) > > I would rather settle on one**, but I appreciate the diplomatic > intervention.
I think the best answer is a hybrid (and it might be where we already are -- nobody's talking about pop-ups for `s', are they?): * the operations that are indisputably very common are single-taps (from 3 above) * the user can modify the bindings of those keys (from 3 above but is there anything to implement? Users can already bind keys) * c-u always forces a pop-up (for command discover-ability) * Some operations get a pop-up regardless of c-u * within pop-ups, double-taps invoke the most common command (from 2 above. Hey, once you have pop-ups, you might as well have a rationale for choosing the assignments within the pop-up, right?) And I'd like to preserve: * Uppercase keys invoke the more-destructive version of the command (e.g. `F' for pull vs. `f' for fetch) -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
