Community
Participate
Working Groups
The "optimize" option and it's side effect cannot be easily reverted. Also the "Optmize" name is confusing as hell. It does not convey what is about to happen.
Ok, I see two issues here: you want optimize to be a toggle to revert to the previous sort order easily AND you find "Optimize" to be a confusing name. I will do my best on both fronts. 1- we tried, if it is a toggle, it would be to revert. This would not work with the idea of re-optimizing when we change time ranges to optimize. We explored the option, and even had before a button to un-optimize, it was -2'ed. 2- What would you suggest? I feel optimize is really cool as a catch-all "ensure arrows on the screen are minimal length" way to describe a situation, and it is generic enough to work after with new link sources. This is not a bug but rather an enhancement I think. As the program is working as defined.
(In reply to Matthew Khouzam from comment #1) > Ok, I see two issues here: > you want optimize to be a toggle to revert to the previous sort order easily > > AND > > you find "Optimize" to be a confusing name. > > I will do my best on both fronts. > > 1- we tried, if it is a toggle, it would be to revert. This would not work > with the idea of re-optimizing when we change time ranges to optimize. We > explored the option, and even had before a button to un-optimize, it was > -2'ed. Why not apply on each visual time range modification (Toggle)? This is a *sort*-ish mechanism. Another options would be to move this under the presentation menu and have it as a toggle radio button just like the two other option and make sure that on transition to flat and hierarchical the presentation is reverted to the initial way of doing it (full refresh). Also I observed that using the optimize button switch to a flat representation but does not update the radio button under the Thread Presentation menu. > > 2- What would you suggest? I feel optimize is really cool as a catch-all > "ensure arrows on the screen are minimal length" way to describe a Condense, Sort by arrow length (Tool tip), Optimize base on arrow length (Tooltip). > situation, and it is generic enough to work after with new link sources. link source? Do you mean other way of "optimizing"? Well for now there is no other way and the generic name is simply to vague for anyone to understand from the tool tip or button name what it does (not even sure this is an option in eclipse to never show icon and replace with the button name/text/whatever) without reading the doc. Let me check ... it's not even there in the doc ( ctrl+f on optimize yield nothing). Also if it's based on arrow should it be disabled if I choose to not display arrow? > > This is not a bug but rather an enhancement I think. As the program is > working as defined. Sure feel free to mark it as an enhancement (Seems like you already did +1). Do you want me to open a bug regarding the lack of documentation and the Thread Presentation update?
The "Optimize" action invokes internally the "Flat" action, but the radio state of the "Thread Presentation" actions remains the same (at worst "Hierarchical"). This is inconsistent and is rather a bug. Apart from that, the "Optimize" action confuses also many of our users. Nobody understands what it really does. Sometimes users click on the button accidentally (e.g. when they want to use the filter) and then don't know how to undo this action because there is no easy way to do it. I agree with Jonathan that a better place for this action would be the "Thread Presentation" menu, as an additional radio option. Alternatively all three presentation actions could be placed in the toolbar in a separate section (retaining the radio functionality).
