Re: [Rhythmbox-devel] Source groups

["James \"Doc\" Livingston" <doclivingston gmail com>]

On Mon, 2007-03-05 at 01:58 +0200, Mika Wahlroos wrote:
> I do. Perhaps not so much directly, but indirectly. Traditionally, when 
> I create a new playlist it appears at the end of the group. It's obvious 
> where it goes, and I can easily find it when filling it with tracks from 
> the library. At least for me it's quite common to do that a lot when 
> creating a playlist, so having the playlist easily locatable is perhaps 
> even more important at that point than in other situations.

Having it move itself once you entered a name for the playlist would be
a bit disconcerting. I've just noticed an oddity, it only seems to
alphabetise the playlists on startup.


> I guess it doesn't matter so much, but unless there's a seriously high 
> number of playlists, I fail to see how alphabetical listing would make 
> finding a playlist significantly easier than having them in a random
> order would.

If you do have such a large number of playlists, having better
organisation method would probably be useful. Such as the sometimes
requested "playlist folders".

For a relatively small number of playlists, it probably doesn't make
such of a difference, as you say.


> Please correct me if there's actual evidence to the 
> contrary, because mine is just a gut feeling. On the other hand, being 
> able to order the items in the list so that they make sense in some 
> other, more personal way would seem to make finding things on the list easy.

I don't really have enough playlists myself to be affected by it, but it
sounds like people with a reasonable number of playlists find manual
sorting useful.


Cheers,

James "Doc" Livingston
-- 
I think I've finally worked out why the Irish drink Guinness. It's to
lubricate their throat so they can speak their own language. -- David P.