On 5/18/06, Lübbe Onken <email@example.com> wrote:
> I followed that thread on thedailywtf.com. There were two good suggestions
> by people, that I'd like to forward to the list. I added the headlines.
> Quoted text below:
> 1) Reverse the Order of warning and selection of new URL
> the Very Stupid Thing about the Tortoise dialog, though, is that it comes
> after you've asked for a relocation and entered the new location of your
> This means that if you pick the "wrong" choice then you're kinda fucked: if
> you click Yes (as the implied question is "Do you want to relocate?" indeed)
> the relocation starts immediately.
> In fact, would they so much as swap the dialogs (first this one then asking
> for the new location) the workflow would become much more interresting and
> this message would actually be useful. They could swap it to a regular alert
> message too, since you'd have the ability to pick whether you'll really
> relocate or not right at the next dialog.
I don't like the idea of reversing the order. Because, that dialog
could be hidden behind other windows (between the right-click,
choosing "relocate" and the time the dialog really is shown, other
windows might show up). So the user won't really connect the warning
dialog with the relocate command.
> 2) Use OK / Cancel instead of Yes / No
> If the dialog used OK/Cancel buttons, it'd be good as-is. It's as simple as
> changing the options to the dialog box in Win32 to MB_OKCANCEL |
I've already changed the text slightly:
Also, I've changed the code so that this warning only is shown if the
base part of an url is left unchaged - that indicates a possible
switch and the warning is shown. If however the base part of an url
has changed, then a switch couldn't do that and the warning isn't
--> no warning
--> no warning
--> warning shown
> And there's anonther one from thedailywtf.com:
> And TortoiseSVN is full of unhelpful things. It installs a start menu item,
> that when clicked, snidely advises that you should access it via an entirely
> different means to every other normal program installed on your machine. Of
Yes of course. We rewrite TSVN to be not a shell extension but a normal app.
> course it could have done something helpful, perhaps bring up the Options
> dialogue or something, but you know... that would require usability design.
> Of course this person didn't get the point, why the start menu item is
> there, but he has got a point in telling us to do something meaningful. I'd
> suggest to open the TortoiseSVN help file on a page that explains why there
> is no TortoiseSVN executable running on the desktop instead of showing this
Opening the help file is not good. We'd get a lot of 'bug' (sorry, I
meant: "BUG!!!") reports about TSVN not starting up but just showing
the helpfile, or the start menu link wrongly pointing to the helpfile
instead of the program. People (especially those that messagebox is
for) don't read help pages. But they might read a messagebox (it's
just little enough text for them to not ignore it), and a messagebox
indicates that at least the link is right.
That entry you quoted clearly shows the kind of people we have to deal
with here. Even with the messagebox (clearly telling him *why* things
are the way they are), he still doesn't get it and complains that TSVN
> I'd also vote for a TortoiseSVN Options entry in the start menu.
That however is a good idea.
oo // \\ "De Chelonian Mobile"
(_,\/ \_/ \ TortoiseSVN
\ \_/_\_/> The coolest Interface to (Sub)Version Control
/_/ \_\ http://tortoisesvn.tigris.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com
Received on Thu May 18 10:46:08 2006