Bug 194830 - Implement spreadsheet like layout (as in 1.x series)
Summary: Implement spreadsheet like layout (as in 1.x series)
Status: CONFIRMED
Alias: None
Product: amarok
Classification: Applications
Component: Playlist (show other bugs)
Version: 2.1-SVN
Platform: Compiled Sources Linux
: NOR wishlist
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Amarok Developers
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2009-06-01 09:23 UTC by Vito De Tullio
Modified: 2015-04-21 05:44 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 Vito De Tullio 2009-06-01 09:23:14 UTC
Version:           2.1-SVN (using Devel)
OS:                Linux
Installed from:    Compiled sources

I like the new "Playlist layout" editor. I use it to re-create my old amarok 1.x "spreadsheet-like" layout: I'm a bit "naïve", and I really like to view many columns, all in a row for each song.
From the cool things I found I really like the possibility to insert "dividers".
At the moment I set to
* show nothing into the head (I don't really get into the "visually group songs", sorry)
* show a lot of thing into the body and into the single (btw: is there a way to set it once?)

artist, divider, year, album, disc number, divider, track number, title, divider, length

Yeah. They are a lot.

I set the relative size of every column, but... the problem is I had to choose a "median" of the length of the infos in my collection. The most of the times, sadly, I only see part of the infos, because of a particular big artist name, or a strange title.

I *can*, then, re-impost the values into the playlist layout editor, but, it's chumsky, and not very easy (does it's 20% for a album name enough? should I set 23?).

For this problem I can thing about 2 solution:
1) find a way to "automagically" resize the columns size using the content, trying to not show ellipses (...)
2) let the user rearrange the column size, maybe using the "dividers".
Comment 1 Vito De Tullio 2009-06-02 07:52:00 UTC
I'm sorry, but I don't think it's a wish.
I like the playlist layout editor, but I think it's a poor idea the necessity to set the columns size with a value

* "a priori",
* fixed (well, a relative percentage, but you get the idea),
* impossible to change without *editing directly the layout* (I don't want a "layout for songs with really long titles"),
* without a visual impact (all I have it's a slider and a number from 0 to X) to where the column will end,

besides, I need to set a value *for every column*, and if I need to make the artist column bigger, I need to resize almost other 3 column to reduce, always manually, their column size to have some percentage point to give to the artist.
Comment 2 baufrecht 2009-09-19 17:53:38 UTC
Hi,

this issue still exists with Version 2.1.85.
I also tried to revert back to the old amarok 1.4 layout in the playlist.

Even with only 4 columns for example:
Title | Artist | Album | Time
the playlist editor has problems in adjusting the correct size.

I am also missing the option to change the size of a column directly in the playlist.

This is a little bit annoying because amarok 1.4 works so well here.
Comment 3 Myriam Schweingruber 2009-09-19 23:15:46 UTC
I think this is more a usability problem, but I let Nikolaj decide on that.
Comment 4 Nikolaj Hald Nielsen 2009-09-20 09:11:04 UTC
This is a wishlist item.

The main reason this is a wishlist item and not a bug is that having an excel like playlist layout was never the main intention of the new playlist. Personally I think it can emulate one pretty well, but inline resizing of columns is not possible, and likely will not ever be since the playlist really has no concept of "columns" since different rows can have have a different amount of items.

Some work is happening making the playlist editor cater better to this usage though, by adding an option to automatically adjust the widths of each item, but this is work in progress and will not make it into 2.2.0
Comment 5 baufrecht 2009-09-20 20:23:56 UTC
> The main reason this is a wishlist item and not a bug is that having an excel
> like playlist layout was never the main intention of the new playlist.

I would still consider this a bug. Because currently it does not work as expected. The current playlist may be way better than the old one, but i consider this "wishlist" item as a basic function that has to work.

> Some work is happening making the playlist editor cater better to this usage
> though, by adding an option to automatically adjust the widths of each item,
> but this is work in progress and will not make it into 2.2.0

Well now i raised the issue and hopefully it will be fixed somehow at a later date. ;) 

Thanks for your replies.
Comment 6 Nikolaj Hald Nielsen 2009-09-22 11:50:38 UTC
> I would still consider this a bug. Because currently it does not work as
> expected. The current playlist may be way better than the old one, but i
> consider this "wishlist" item as a basic function that has to work.

Still, it works as designed, be that right or wrong! We could spend all week nitpicking over this I imagine. In any case, I have actually come up with an idea that would both make you happy (I hope) and still make sense seeing as the playlist lacks any form of global columns. 

How about adding this feature to the inline edit widget? So as well as editing track info, there could be a splitter between each element in a row and they could be dynamically resized like that? Then the question is whether to consider this actually modifying the layout, or not make it persistent at all.

Still a wishlist item though! :-P
Comment 7 Kevin Funk 2009-09-22 16:32:49 UTC
I'd like to get it back aswell, missing it badly. I might look into it some time, maybe.
Comment 8 Nikolaj Hald Nielsen 2009-09-22 17:11:37 UTC
Prototype: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9L9saiMfik
Comment 9 Kevin Funk 2010-01-28 14:31:35 UTC
Ugh, just saw your prototype for the first time. Nikolaj, is it not possible to have global columns with the new playlist view?
That feature we have right now is really really undiscoverable if you're not aware of it.