The Thunar Path

Biju Chacko botsie at
Fri Nov 18 05:02:09 CET 2005

aussiefax at wrote:
> First:
> Sorry I missed the Thunar mailing list.  Seems a little redundant to  
> matter.  I'll happily use it but like I said I'm not a developer so my input really 
> belongs here.
> Second:
> I don't claim to be as technically savvy as most of you.  I assume  
> you're all mostly developers.  I am an artist.  I see things  
> visually.  My thoughts on this are more simple than yours. To really break it  
> down, I'd love to use a system that looks and feels like iTunes to  
> manage and dig through my files.    Eventually, this will happen.   
> Whether on linux, OS X or Windows.  In fact it's obviously already  
> started in many different forms.  The average user doesn't remember  
> where they've saved their files.  I know this because I sell  
> computers for a living.  I'm not sitting in my mom's basement writing  
> code and watching Babylon 5.  I see my confused customers every day.  The 
> same customer's that can't remember where they saved their Office 
> documents could tell you exactly where their Bob Dylan songs are.   
> Something like the iTunes interface (Type Manager) along with  
> something like Spotlight (or Beagle) for searching would sure make it easier 
> for the average user because a file hierarchy is no longer  
> between them and their data.  When I first thought of the idea it  
> sickened me as well.  I like to keep all my files in their nice  
> little folders.  I know where everything is.  But I'm not the average  
> computer user either and the more I think about a change in file  
> management, the more I embrace the idea.
> Point well taken that the Type Manager is currently used in countless  
> programs to organize more specific files.  But lets break out of our  
> box for a moment shall we?  When I run iTunes I'm no longer JUST ,  
> managing music, I'm managing: jazz, rock, punk, opera, etc.  Then  
> suddenly I'm a level deeper managing: Beatles, Elvis, They Might Be  
> Giants, etc.  Get the picture?  What kinds of files do most NORMAL  
> users have?  contacts, jpegs, gifs, calendars, notes, movies, word,  
> etc.  I could break these up into separate folders (playlists).  Not  
> folders that the system has made and named for me, but folders within  
> a type manager program that are listed out alphabetically that "I"  
> have made and named myself!   Suddenly, they're much easier to find  
> and search for than ever before!  A type Manager (in my opinion) is a  
> good all around system for managing ALL of a users files.

Frankly, this is not somehing that should be done at the UI level. What 
you're talking about is, IMO, a filesystem issue. BFS, for example, 
could probably have done what you ask.

Why is this an FS issue? Wouldn't it be incredibly irritating to sort 
your data based on tags in your "Type Manager" and then not be able to 
be able to use the same logic to open the file in OpenOffice?

Does it make sense to visualise something one way in the GUI and then 
not be able to use the same logic in a shell script?

Of course, I suspect it'll be a bit of a job to build a tag-based FS and 
still be POSIX-compliant.

> Personally... building a normal file manager like Thunar, that is  
> really nothing different than OS X's Finder or Gnome's Nautilus,  
> really seems like a waste of time.  By the time it's out, it will be  
> outdated.  The link to the article was meant as an opportunity to  
> perhaps inspire some of you.  A few of you seemed to like it while  
> others did not.  Whatever your opinion, you cannot deny that this is  
> a system seriously being considered for the future to replace the  
> standard file manager.  It's something that any developer (I would  
> think) would take interest in.  Especially one working on the  
> development of a file manager like Thunar.  I'm not saying it's the answer to 
> all the file management problems in the world, just something worth looking 
> at.

Again, you're bitching at the wrong people: hence the lack of interest. 
Go crib on lkml or the kernel list of whichever OS you use.

> Third:
> It's sad to see some linux developers living up to the hasty  
> generalizations that are attached to them.  I'm glad you're so  
> opinionated, but I'd loose the cockiness or you'll miss out on the future,  
> and people will be yawning at your point-of-view instead.  Developers should 
> be taking the opinions of their users seriously, no matter how mundane or 
> idiotic they may seem.  After all, It's the user's choice that matters, not  
> the developers'.  I am looking forward to using Thunar (it sure looks nicer 
> than ROX), but I'd really like to see it become something unique, because I 
> believe in what the developers of XFCE are setting out to accomplish with 
> their desktop.  Simplicity.

You're awfully snippy for someone who's completely dependent on the 
goodwill of others to get software. And I'm not sure what you're so 
annoyed about. Your request was taken seriously enough to be answered, 
wasn't it? Or are you just saying that developers should blindly agree 
to whatever their users say without thinking about it?

You made a feature request, it was turned down. It happens. Get over it.

-- b

More information about the Xfce mailing list