Comments
Sort by recent activity
>> A fixed list would be preferable for my usage with the option to open other projects as needed.
I could work with that if opening other projects was also visual. I really don't want to change my way of thinking to force myself to either name all of my projects or remember what SQL Compare decided to name them. Visually parsing those long names is quite tedious, and I really think they got the visual representation in the 7.0 dialog (and the new dropdown) right. It just needs an easier way to get at more than 6 projects that way. / comments
>> A fixed list would be preferable for my usage with the option to open other projects as needed.
I could work with that if opening other projects was also visual. I really don't want to change m...
The new dropdown isn't missing anything, except that it only holds 6 projects. I should be able to access all my projects there.
The menu entry under File is much less useful to me. I'd like to stay with the visual identification and not have to know or care what you're calling the SCP file names behind the scenes.
So in other words, keep the drop down, but make it hold all of my projects instead of 6. This would most closely mimic the behavior of the old project dialog from version <= 7. If you can fix that I don't think you will have to invest any time into making file names easier to identify, coming up with better defaults, etc. / comments
The new dropdown isn't missing anything, except that it only holds 6 projects. I should be able to access all my projects there.
The menu entry under File is much less useful to me. I'd like to s...
I meant the file menu item, not the larger dropdown.
Sure, if I save as I can create my own. And that's great if I'm a first-time user or if I'm adding a bunch of new projects. When I am upgrading and I have 30 or 40, none of which I had ever seen a name for before this version, it's less useful, because they're already named with these log and non-visual names. The first 6 look fine but then if I am browsing for it I have to parse these big long names. / comments
I meant the file menu item, not the larger dropdown.
Sure, if I save as I can create my own. And that's great if I'm a first-time user or if I'm adding a bunch of new projects. When I am upgradin...
Can you post a list of features that were changed or removed, and where applicable, explain why? For some of these features I am more than happy to change the way I work if I understand the reason. In this specific case, the dialog worked fine, and I am curious why it was felt it needed to be removed / replaced. / comments
Can you post a list of features that were changed or removed, and where applicable, explain why? For some of these features I am more than happy to change the way I work if I understand the reason...
Six is not enough.
The "open location from disk" is cumbersome (see below)
The "File|Recent" is ugly because they are all in the same format: [image] \Documents and Settings\abertrand\My Documents\SQL Compare\Projects\192 168 3 202 dbname v 192 168 5 205 dbname dd-mm-yyyy.hh-nn-ss.msms.SCP
It is very hard to tell these apart visually. And if I need a project that is not in the most recent 6 (I have about 30 right now), I have to browse for it.
The dialog was better because it had ALL of my projects. This was very handy. Scrolling, and identifying a project visually, is much easier and more fun than navigating through a file browse dialog and then visually parsing these cryptic SCP file names. / comments
Six is not enough.
The "open location from disk" is cumbersome (see below)
The "File|Recent" is ugly because they are all in the same format:\Documents and Settings\abertrand\My Documents\SQL Compa...
Well I think avoiding the re-compare is beneficial, regardless of whether it takes seconds or minutes. Your scenario doesn't motivate me to change my opinion. / comments
Well I think avoiding the re-compare is beneficial, regardless of whether it takes seconds or minutes. Your scenario doesn't motivate me to change my opinion.
But why does REQUIRING a re-compare make the scenario better? / comments
But why does REQUIRING a re-compare make the scenario better?
Meaning you don't care if you have to re-compare? I think your opinion might change slightly if you had a bigger / more complex schema and the re-compare took minutes instead of seconds. [image] / comments
Meaning you don't care if you have to re-compare? I think your opinion might change slightly if you had a bigger / more complex schema and the re-compare took minutes instead of seconds.
Oh I agree the databases should not switch sides (and repeated that emphatically in another thread here). Just the directional arrow. / comments
Oh I agree the databases should not switch sides (and repeated that emphatically in another thread here). Just the directional arrow.
rtowne@smarsh.com wrote:
If you changed it so double clicking the arrow would swap the sides -- my first thoughts are that this would be more clumsy and would lead to more mistakes using the product than what you are trying to alleviate.
That's what the product does now (7.0). The change is very obvious... the arrow is huge and it becomes green instead of blue when facing the other direction. Anyway I am not advocating that double-click should continue working; I would be fine to have the double-click removed (though I doubt there are many cases of accidental double-clicks there). But having it back on the right-click context menu (which is how I use this functionality in the current product) would be much appreciated. / comments
rtowne@smarsh.com wrote:
If you changed it so double clicking the arrow would swap the sides -- my first thoughts are that this would be more clumsy and would lead to more mistakes using the pro...