[Thunar-dev] Actions extensions in File Manager
pwieser at trychlos.org
Sat Jan 9 16:45:02 CET 2010
----- "Jonas Bähr" <jonas.baehr at web.de> wrote:
> Am 07.01.2010 um 15:22 schrieb Pierre Wieser:
> > ...
> > ----- "Jonas Bähr" <jonas.baehr at web.de> a écrit :
> >> "Path" should not be unspecified by default but rather default to
> >> "%d"
> > I agree that "Path" should better have a default value.
> > But not sure a variable default is a good thing.
> > I'd rather make the home directory the default. This would appear
> > as closer of usual Unix standards...
> I don't think this is a good idea. If I execute "ls -l > some_file" I
> expect some_file to be in the current directory, not in my home. I
> can't name you any standard here, but from my experience "some_file"
> is always synonym to "./some_file". I have not seen any case where
> it's interpreted as "~/some_file".
> That's why I strongly suggest "%d" as the default for the working
Well, yes, I agree with you that in a terminal I expect the commands I
type do refer to the current working directory.
Nonetheless, when I open this same terminal without specifying anything,
the current working directory is in my home. Don't you think your argument
might be seen as a bit biased ?
IMHO, a better argument to choose current directory would be that when
we right click on an item in a file manager, we already have a current
working directory. It could make sense to choose this same working directory
as a default for "Path". But maybe this is what you meant ?
>From another point of view, this default directory is not thought to address
files, but to run a program. I'm afraid many programs may (badly) suppose that
their running directory is writable, or in some way, "owned" by the runner.
Last I must admit that I'm a bit relunctant to have a default directory
which depends of the place where user happens to click. Do you have any
opinion about that ?
More information about the Thunar-dev