Bug 17289 - Small wish regarding .directory
Summary: Small wish regarding .directory
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 322922
Alias: None
Product: dolphin
Classification: Applications
Component: general (show other bugs)
Version: 16.12.2
Platform: unspecified Other
: NOR wishlist
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Peter Penz
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2000-12-18 08:33 UTC by Horst Timmermann
Modified: 2019-02-10 21:15 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

See Also:
Latest Commit:
Version Fixed In:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description David Faure 2000-12-18 15:17:01 UTC
On Mon Dec 18 2000 at 10:17:21AM -0700 Horst Timmermann wrote:
> Package: konqueror
> Version: cvs from 20001217
> Severity: wish
> 
> If konqui points to a spezific directory I am changing the viewpoint and I 
> have writequalification konqui generates a file .directory with some entrys 
> regarding the viewparameters. As I am sharing some of the directoy's with 
> some other people also using KDE I would like to suppress this behaviour of 
> konqui for part of the tree.

Hmm I understand that you said "for some parts of the tree" and
indeed we could have something like "NoWrite" in the .directory file...
Not sure how the UI should look like though.

Note that you can already turn off this behaviour completely by unchecking
"View properties saved in directory" in the Settings menu. Probably
safer for this case...

> Konqui becomes better and better: congratulations.
Thanks :)

-- 
David FAURE
david@mandrakesoft.com faure@kde.org
http://home.clara.net/faure/ http://www.konqueror.org/
KDE Making The Future of Computing Available Today
Comment 1 Horst Timmermann 2000-12-18 17:17:21 UTC
(*** This bug was imported into bugs.kde.org ***)

Package: konqueror
Version: cvs from 20001217
Severity: wish

If konqui points to a spezific directory I am changing the viewpoint and I 
have writequalification konqui generates a file .directory with some entrys 
regarding the viewparameters. As I am sharing some of the directoy's with 
some other people also using KDE I would like to suppress this behaviour of 
konqui for part of the tree.

Konqui becomes better and better: congratulations.

mfG HT
Comment 2 Waldo Bastian 2000-12-18 19:49:47 UTC
On Monday 18 December 2000 07:17 David Faure wrote:
> On Mon Dec 18 2000 at 10:17:21AM -0700 Horst Timmermann wrote:
> > Package: konqueror
> > Version: cvs from 20001217
> > Severity: wish
> >
> > If konqui points to a spezific directory I am changing the viewpoint and
> > I have writequalification konqui generates a file .directory with some
> > entrys regarding the viewparameters. As I am sharing some of the
> > directoy's with some other people also using KDE I would like to
> > suppress this behaviour of konqui for part of the tree.
>
> Hmm I understand that you said "for some parts of the tree" and
> indeed we could have something like "NoWrite" in the .directory file...
> Not sure how the UI should look like though.

Maybe we should only turn it on for some parts defaulting to everything that 
starts with $HOME.

Cheers
Waldo
Comment 3 Dominic Chambers 2004-01-22 20:16:44 UTC
I do not see the described problem in KDE 3.1, niether do I have an option to enable it (i.e. "you can already turn off this behaviour completely by unchecking "View properties saved in directory" in the Settings menu").

Is this still relevant?
Comment 4 FiNeX 2009-08-16 15:34:42 UTC
This report is no more valid on KDE4 because the file management is done by Dolphin. The KDE3 version of konqueror is no more mantained.

@Peter: could this be interesting for Dolphin?
Comment 5 Peter Penz 2009-08-16 21:33:44 UTC
@FiNeX: I think the current option to not store .directory files at all should be sufficient. Another option would be to store all .directory files in a mirrored location, but this has also other drawbacks... For me it would be OK to move the report as wish to Dolphin, so that people can vote/comment for this.
Comment 6 FiNeX 2009-08-16 21:57:16 UTC
@Peter: ok, moved. Anyway I agree with you.
Comment 7 Julian Steinmann 2018-03-25 18:00:39 UTC
I am not sure if we should keep this open or not... Anyways, setting status to CONFIRMED.
Comment 8 Elvis Angelaccio 2019-02-10 21:15:07 UTC
This is basically #322922

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 322922 ***