Re: [Gretl-devel] GUI problem with "save as"
Am 09/30/2011 11:09 PM, schrieb Allin Cottrell:
On Fri, 30 Sep 2011, Sven Schreiber wrote:
> Actually, let me go one step back and ask a basic question: why
have the
> variable-selection option at all when the user chooses "save as"?
You just beat me to the punch! After thinking about it some more, that's
what occurred to me. We're just making life difficult for ourselves (and
potentially confusing to the user) by offering that option.
> I mean an analogy of this behavior would be if in a text editor you
> choose "save as" you are asked if you maybe want to edit paragraph
> three some more before actually saving the file under a new name.
> Deleting variables should probably be done afterwards within the new
> datafile. Or, this is like an export-to-database action, which is also
> already possible in gretl.
Or beforehand: delete what you don't want, then choose "Save as".
Well I'm so used to automatically hitting Ctrl-S every once in a while
that I'm afraid I will overwrite my old file after I already deleted
some series. So I always do it the other way around. Plus, deleting
variables is sometimes difficult in gretl when you're not in a fresh
session. Anyway, this is a different discussion.
> (And BTW, maybe save-as-database should be moved/changed to
> export-to-database?)
Yes, it should. These two things make a useful clean-up. The only
immediate issue is what to do for 1.9.6. The first change could be made
without disrupting any translatable strings but I think for the second
one we'd want to put the database export option under File/export data
as "_gretl database..." rather than just "_Database...".
We already have the msgid "gretl database", so I could easily patch the
.pot files for European languages, adding a translation for
"_gretl database...", but I wouldn't want to try that for Chinese.
Reactions from any translators who are listening?
Hm, I doubt that everybody is following this thread. For me personally
it's no big deal to add another small round of translation updates, but
that's obviously not the purpose of the whole release process. Or would
it be so bad to implement the first change now and delay to second to
right after the release of 1.9.6? Of course their spirit is somewhat
related as proven in this thread, but they do not really depend on each
other.
-sven