691380 at bugs.launchpad.net
Thu Jan 5 19:10:47 UTC 2012
(In reply to Charles from comment #136)
> (In reply to Blake Winton (:bwinton - Thunderbird UX) from comment #133)
> >> a) we are talking about bringing something back that was *removed* that a
> >> *lot* of people liked and want to see brought back, and
> > Perhaps the problem is that I'm not talking about bringing back anything…
> Well, that is the point of this whole bug - I should know, I am the one who
> opened it.
Ah, in that case, I'm not really in favour of this, since that sounds
like just adding yet more search boxes to confuse our users with.
(Although, with 144 comments, it's possible I'm _still_ misunderstanding
the point of this bug.)
> > Also, the fact that there are two different modes is one of the problems I
> > have with it.
> Flexibility sometimes comes with a certain level of complexity, but I don't
> think this is all that complicated, it just takes a little experimentation
> and getting used to how it works.
I disagree, which seems to put us at an impasse.
Our user-testing has shown that people have problems with the two search
bars, and trying to figure out which one to use for what kind of
searches. Merging them into a single bar that sometimes does what you
want and sometimes doesn't doesn't seem to me to be a good way to
resolve that issue, and I think we can do better than that.
> > For the add-on, to clear the options, Esc+Esc is a _horrible_ key
> > combination.
> And what would you call having to use 'Ctrl-F' to enable the 'Find in
> message' filter, and then have to use 'Esc' to hide it again? At least the
> nonsensical *double* use of 'Ctrl-f' (depending on context) and double-esc
> for toggling the QFB and/or the 'Find in message' filters was finally
> sort-of fixed (I still hate it, but it is less painful now).
That was another key combo didn't work out. (I'm also not particularly
happy with the current set of key combos, but if we ever manage to merge
the QFB and Gloda bars, we can just use Ctrl-K, which is better, I
> Really, Blake, it sounds like you're looking to bash this addon just because
> - well, I honestly don't know why.
I'm not trying to bash the add-on (and said so to Iago in email), I'm
just trying to point out things that I would want to see improved/fixed
before landing something like this in Thunderbird.
> Maybe you're offended that there are a
> lot of people who don't agree with the decision to *lose* the message filter
> searchbox rather than just add the QFB as a new *optional* way to filter
> messages, and that someone very capable (thanks Iago!) actually stepped up
> and did something about it?
Well, it wasn't my decision, so I'm not particularly offended. (But I'm
also not convinced that only ever adding things, and never taking things
away is a path that will lead to good software.)
> > Not being a toolbar doesn't make it more minimal. Neither does making it
> > smaller. (For that matter, neither does removing text labels from iconic
> > buttons.)
> Ok, Blake, no offense, but you simply cannot be serious. It *does* make it
> more 'minimal', in the sense that it takes up less *space* *and* allows the
> user the freedom to put the searchbox wherever they want and be able to
> filter messages without having another huge toolbar taking up more precious
> screen real estate, which is *the* *whole* *point*.
I see that you and I are talking about two completely different things.
I don't care how much space we take up, if we get an easier to use
You seem to not care how easy something is to use, as long as it takes
up as little space as possible.
(Or, put another way, I want something that's conceptually minimal,
whereas I think you want something that's physically minimal. Does that
> I (and there are lots more like me) *don't* *like* the QFB, precisely
> because it is a *toolbar*. It was the *reason* I opened this bug, and the
> *reason* that Iago coded the Unified Search Addon
This wasn't clear to me from the title or the comments I read.
> >> The whole point of this addon is to eliminate the need for a huge toolbar,
> >> and give us back the little filter searchbox that can be placed wherever we
> >> want like TB 3.0- had.
> > That's fine, but that's not the point of this bug.
> *Yes it is*. Maybe you should go up and read the opening comment. I should
> know, I wrote it/opened this bug.
Ah, okay. I don't really have a lot more to say on this bug, then,
since I'm _far_ more interested in merging the GlodaBar and QFB…
> > (Or maybe it is, but that's not necessarily the direction that will get a
> > ui-r+ from me…) The point of this bug (as I see it) is to move forward
> > with a better UI, not to bring back any specific UI from the past.
> Then you must have never bothered to read the opening comment. Too bad,
> because the loss of the movable search box was a huge blow for many, many
Perhaps it was, but I haven't heard that many people complaining about
it. (Maybe because Iago's add-on is satisfying their needs?)
> What really bugs me the most about this attitude of yours, Blake, is, most
> of the time in cases like this, developers will say something like - 'hey,
> it is free software, if you want the old behavior back, send us a patch, and
> as long as it is well written, works as advertised and doesn't introduce new
> bugs or change the desired *new* functionality, we'll work it in'.
It seems to me that that would lead to software that has everything but
the kitchen sink, and is basically unusable out-of-the-box for anyone
who didn't start using it ages ago, and thus is familiar with all the
various options. So part of my job is picking and choosing. If people
> Well, the
> heavy lifting has already been done by Iago, and I'm sure Iago would be
> willing to work with you guys on any changes you wanted/needed to get this
> code properly integrated into the core. But it seems that you simply are
> unable to grasp the fact that not everyone is enamored with the new QFB as a
> total replacement for the little searchbox widget, and so cannot see the
> value/benefit. Sad, really.
I understand that not everyone likes changes we make, but I still
haven't been convinced that the benefit of this would outweigh the cost.
(For you, I'm certain it does, but you're not the only Thunderbird user,
nor even a typical Thunderbird user, so basing all my decisions on what
works best for you isn't really a great idea. ;) (And to forestall any
accusations, I'm not a typical Thunderbird user either, and don't base
my decisions on what works best for me.)
> Change for change's sake is not always for the best, and killing off the
> simple/movable message searchbox filter was a *mistake*, in mine and many
> others' opinions.
It may or may not have been. The toolbar certainly seem easier to
understand than having a textbox with some extra dropdown options. I
hear that you dislike the amount of space it takes up, but if you're
happy with Iago's add-on, then I don't really understand why you're
pushing to get it merged into core…
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Mozilla
Bugs, which is subscribed to Mozilla Thunderbird.
Quick Search Filter should be moveable
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
More information about the Ubuntu-mozillateam-bugs