Hi, On Sun, 13 Aug 2006 16:07:12 +0200, Jannis Pohlmann wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 19:25:17 +0100, Erlend Davidson wrote: > >> >> On 12 Aug 2006, at 13:57, Jannis Pohlmann wrote: >> >> > On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 12:41:16 +0000 (UTC), Danny Milosavljevic wrote: >> > [...] > Well, of course you're right. But if I decide to *overwrite* a > file/folder, I don't expect the old one to be moved to the *trash*. > The terms are important (at least to me). The point is that you wouldn't "decide" to overwrite a particular file, but rather you copy a huge folder over another folder, and it will merge them, and overwrite the files with the same name. In that case the overwritten file should go to the trash. Even when you actually just drag&drop one file to a destination folder that has a file of the same name, I still think trashing is the right thing. > Doing it that way (overwrite => > move old stuff to trash) sounds like a crippled variation of a > versioned filesystem. You just described what a trash is. > > The only way to do this right - and this is where it's getting complex > - is a *real* versioned filesystem and this is just out of reach for > Thunar at the moment. > > - Jannis cheers, Danny _______________________________________________ Thunar-dev mailing list [email protected] http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/thunar-dev
