XYplorer Beta Club

1. "Collapse All" in the context menu. Right click on a parent folder (or drive) and ALL sub-folders collapse as well as the parent.

2. Ability to open a separate tree for the second pane.

1. Right click on the desired folder in the tree > Expansion > Fully collapse

Marco wrote:1. Right click on the desired folder in the tree > Expansion > Fully collapse

Or CTRL+Click on "-" icon.

Don80449 wrote:2. Ability to open a separate tree for the second pane.

See http://www.xyplorer.com/xyfc/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=9017

And also please do a basic search for topics such as this before posting...helps all of us here...thanks!

j_c_hallgren wrote:

Don80449 wrote:2. Ability to open a separate tree for the second pane.

See http://www.xyplorer.com/xyfc/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=9017

And also please do a basic search for topics such as this before posting...helps all of us here...thanks!

Thank you. And also, I *did* do a search on both questions. In both Help and the forum. Since the dual tree will never be a feature in XyPlorer I will just uninstall the trial and move on. Thanks again.

Don80449 wrote:Thank you. And also, I *did* do a search on both questions. In both Help and the forum. Since the dual tree will never be a feature in XyPlorer I will just uninstall the trial and move on. Thanks again.

I wouldn't say "never" but guess when Don gets around to it, and if there are enough users requesting, seems like a few from searching the forum. If you like dual tree, you can open two XY sessions, or multiple, or try Free Commander. There might be other File Managers out there that provides dual-tree with dual-pane besides FC.

unix wrote:I wouldn't say "never" but guess when Don gets around to it, and if there are enough users requesting, seems like a few from searching the forum. If you like dual tree, you can open two XY sessions, or multiple, or try Free Commander. There might be other File Managers out there that provides dual-tree with dual-pane besides FC.

As I vaguely recall (been too long ago) that it took at least two years or so to convince Don of need to add dual-pane so dual-tree may be similar...there are some things which he feels doesn't fit his design plans and this could be one of those...or the amount of work involved doesn't appear to match the benefits as it may likely involve some major restructuring and he feels that its's better to add a number of smaller/easier features instead as they may be used by more of the customer base.

j_c_hallgren wrote:

unix wrote:I wouldn't say "never" but guess when Don gets around to it, and if there are enough users requesting, seems like a few from searching the forum. If you like dual tree, you can open two XY sessions, or multiple, or try Free Commander. There might be other File Managers out there that provides dual-tree with dual-pane besides FC.

As I vaguely recall (been too long ago) that it took at least two years or so to convince Don of need to add dual-pane so dual-tree may be similar...there are some things which he feels doesn't fit his design plans and this could be one of those...or the amount of work involved doesn't appear to match the benefits as it may likely involve some major restructuring and he feels that its's better to add a number of smaller/easier features instead as they may be used by more of the customer base.

Dual Tree would easily take 2 months to build and another 10 to debug.

admin wrote:Dual Tree would easily take 2 months to build and another 10 to debug.

I'd guessed it would be a very major project and the potential base of new customers from it, compared to...say, MLS...makes it unpractical...This may be one of those cases where we just hope that all the other features of XY will be enough to offset the lack of dual tree and/or hope that user might be able to adapt to a different way of doings tasks with single tree.

I wonder how the "dual tree required" folks are able to cope with a tablet or smartphone setup where you barely see the file system (from what I know/understand)!

j_c_hallgren wrote:

admin wrote:Dual Tree would easily take 2 months to build and another 10 to debug.

I'd guessed it would be a very major project and the potential base of new customers from it, compared to...say, MLS...makes it unpractical...This may be one of those cases where we just hope that all the other features of XY will be enough to offset the lack of dual tree and/or hope that user might be able to adapt to a different way of doings tasks with single tree.

I wonder how the "dual tree required" folks are able to cope with a tablet or smartphone setup where you barely see the file system (from what I know/understand)! :mrgreen:

Download file managers, like Android Assistance (more than just FM), shell access to view more files at prompt. But then I'm thinking most Android users don't intend to manage that many files on their mobile device :-)

admin wrote:Dual Tree would easily take 2 months to build and another 10 to debug.

Maybe a bit of overstatement?
(At least the time for debugging?)

For Dual Pane there were 2,5 weeks from 1st mention in change log (7.90.0400 29.5.2009) to the official release (8.00.0000 15.6.2009), and 2 more weeks to the latest directly related bug fix (8.10.0000 30.6.2009).

No question: there was a lot of work before that started.
But I think Dual Tree would be much easyer - I think there's not so much to decide about design and features as was with DP.
(Especially for DP you had to think about implementing DT - for DT you know you *have* DP )

I'm sure you hated DP before you implemented it.
After you had done it you felt quite comfortable with it, I think?
At least later on you brought a lot of extensions to DP, often from your own ideas. I think you wouldn't have done that if you still would think DP is useless...

So I said it when DP was designed, and I still say it today: I would love Dual Tree

PeterH wrote:

admin wrote:Dual Tree would easily take 2 months to build and another 10 to debug.

Maybe a bit of overstatement?
(At least the time for debugging?)

For Dual Pane there were 2,5 weeks from 1st mention in change log (7.90.0400 29.5.2009) to the official release (8.00.0000 15.6.2009), and 2 more weeks to the latest directly related bug fix (8.10.0000 30.6.2009).

Understatement! Bugs follow a new feature like a tail of a comet for a much longer time. Bugs are not only instances of malfunction, but they are costs in terms of support communication, fixing time, and documentation. It's a very good idea to avoid them in the first place. Best way to do that: Do not add new features.

admin wrote:

PeterH wrote:

admin wrote:Dual Tree would easily take 2 months to build and another 10 to debug.

Maybe a bit of overstatement?
(At least the time for debugging?)

For Dual Pane there were 2,5 weeks from 1st mention in change log (7.90.0400 29.5.2009) to the official release (8.00.0000 15.6.2009), and 2 more weeks to the latest directly related bug fix (8.10.0000 30.6.2009).

Understatement! Bugs follow a new feature like a tail of a comet for a much longer time. Bugs are not only instances of malfunction, but they are costs in terms of support communication, fixing time, and documentation. It's a very good idea to avoid them in the first place. Best way to do that: Do not add new features.

If this is related to every new feature - isn't it then a bad argument to be used for this one feature?
Seems a bit unfair to me.

Sure, I was a bit ironic. But it all comes down to priorities. The simple answer is: I got better things to do than Dual Tree. (And now it looks I will loose another 1-2 months on the German translation, so new features need to be really extra-super-sexy-convincing to be added in the next time.)

Sad to say: I especially understand the thing with priorities

And very sad seeing what happened to the german translation.
Really bad: I'm not the person for such kind of work.
Maybe someone else can be found the next days. I see that it wouldn't be fine if just German would be missing