Tree - too many folders are open

[ReviewPilot]

Hi,

I work, as it should be, with several Tabs open.
I have two problems (maybe they will be solöved with the DualPane stuff in a way, but for now, I'll describe what disturbs me:

1)
Whenever I change tabs, moving through the tree to my current "folders in use" is very tedious, as all the tree folders from the other tabs are open. The single good thing is the tree moves to Tab folder position (on tabchange), but if I have to use the tree then, it is a damn scrolling or slider work to acces the maybe 2 or 3 folders I use with the content of a single Tab.
What I would need for the tree, is a independent "opened folders" for each single tab - so all unneeded folders in the tree got closed - and opened again if I access the other tab where I needed them.
Like it is now, the tree does not really help me very much, I always try to get around using it as it gets so long and confusing.

2)
I read about it, but am not aware of a method to change it, maybe you have a solution I did not find out:
The history of a tab should be independent from the history of other tabs. As an option in the configuration.

[Pagat]

Hi,

2)
I read about it, but am not aware of a method to change it, maybe you have a solution I did not find out:
The history of a tab should be independent from the history of other tabs. As an option in the configuration.

This one was added on 28.10.2008: Configuration | General | History per tab (the last option).

Edit:
Regarding your 1): Maybe "Auto-optimize tree" is something for you? (Also found under "Configuration | General"):

Auto-optimize tree

Check to automatically collapse non-current nodes in Tree. Rule: Auto-optimize sets in when you expand the current tree node.

Only downside for you that i see is, that the other folders you are working on with that tab are also collapsed.

[ReviewPilot]

Hey Pagat,

thx I'll check that out.

EDIT: have checked it:
-History Tab works great,
-Auto-optimize Tree does not work, don't know the reason.

RP

[ReviewPilot]

-Auto-optimize Tree does not work, don't know the reason.

RP

Hello,
how's Auto-optimize supposed to work? My tree shows no differences to before setting this feature to "true".

[admin]

-Auto-optimize Tree does not work, don't know the reason.

RP

Hello,
how's Auto-optimize supposed to work? My tree shows no differences to before setting this feature to "true".

If you want to optimize the tree now, you do Shift+Numpad Divide.
The Auto-optimize feature works while you surf the tree: non-current expanded nodes are closed when current closed nodes are expanded.

[petersboulton]

The Auto-optimize feature works while you surf the tree: non-current expanded nodes are closed when current closed nodes are expanded.

Er.. they don't seem to exhibit this behaviour for me, either. Nothing happens automatically to non-current nodes when Auto-optimize is enabled.

Is it a you-know-what? Or is the function of this setting so esoteric only xy-gurus know what it actually does?

Pete

[admin]

The Auto-optimize feature works while you surf the tree: non-current expanded nodes are closed when current closed nodes are expanded.

Er.. they don't seem to exhibit this behaviour for me, either. Nothing happens automatically to non-current nodes when Auto-optimize is enabled.

Is it a you-know-what? Or is the function of this setting so esoteric only xy-gurus know what it actually does?

Pete

Works exactly as I said.

[petersboulton]

Works exactly as I said.

Er.. possibly! I see now where I'm going wrong.

This works:

• Start on a subfolder

• Click another parent to select it

• Then click that parent's '+' to expand it

The tree auto-optimizes correctly.

This doesn't work, and I suspect is the cause of confusion.

• Start on a subfolder

• Then click on another parent folder's '+' to expand it

• No tree auto-optimization

In other words, you have to select the folder and then expand it in order for auto-optimize to work.

Personally I think this introduces an unnecessary step and is inconsistent. Though I suppose it could be argued that the inconsistency actually offers the flexibility to either auto-optimize or not.

If the inconsistency is intentional then it would have been helpful to explain the working more carefully to us stoopid newbies!

[admin]

If the inconsistency is intentional then it would have been helpful to explain the working more carefully to us stoopid newbies!

The behavior is indeed intentional. If it would be different then you could never have two branches expanded at the same time when auto-optimize is on -- I think you would not like that.

[ReviewPilot]

Hmm, this is a hard to work out feature.

Sadly, this in no way helps with with my initial issue. Maybe you could look into this?
I change a tab, work there, change to another tab, change to another tab, and suddenly I have Miles of tree on the left side..

[admin]

Hmm, this is a hard to work out feature.

Sadly, this in no way helps with with my initial issue. Maybe you could look into this?
I change a tab, work there, change to another tab, change to another tab, and suddenly I have Miles of tree on the left side..

I added a tweak for a hardcore version of "Auto-Optimize Tree"...

[ReviewPilot]

Hmm, this is a hard to work out feature.

Sadly, this in no way helps with with my initial issue. Maybe you could look into this?
I change a tab, work there, change to another tab, change to another tab, and suddenly I have Miles of tree on the left side..

I added a tweak for a hardcore version of "Auto-Optimize Tree"...

that's great! thx a lot

[admin]

I'd like to hear some feedback on Auto-Optimize. I don't really use it myself so I can't decide the following points:
- Should the "radical way" (AutoOptimizeTreeRadical=1) be the default way?
- Should Auto-Optimize be rather part of the Tree Style (in main menu; KS-able) instead of sitting in Configuration/General?
- Should "Auto-Optimize Radically" be also featured in Tree Style?

[Linkaday]

I'd like to hear some feedback on Auto-Optimize. I don't really use it myself so I can't decide the following points:
- Should the "radical way" (AutoOptimizeTreeRadical=1) be the default way?
- Should Auto-Optimize be rather part of the Tree Style (in main menu; KS-able) instead of sitting in Configuration/General?
- Should "Auto-Optimize Radically" be also featured in Tree Style?

So do i. Most of the time i feel no problem with "too many folders open" - the four-legged desktop in my office is covered with too many folders open all the time - in my job i'm expected to be and so i had to get just used to "multitasking" without getting lost in the woods. But yes, every once in a while there is this heartfelt groan "If there was only two of them!" - that's were MiniTree (what a stroke of genius) jumps right in!

OTOH if i try to anticipate other states of mind:
- i'd like to say no to the default way (if WE and a fair amount of other file managers had it this way - yes). Too many open "Where is my ...", "Can't find my ..."
- imagining i would use it, yes i would like it KS-able
- no - i see the Treestyle Submenu about how the elements of tree are shown