OFM Shortcuts Support

Skip to first unread message

Martin Kotelnik

Apr 4, 2018, 1:06:44 PM4/4/18
to krusader-devel
Rade suggested we could support standard OFM (Orthodox File Maneger) shortcuts.

Rade's original post here:

Wiki about OFM:

Rade, please add another source if you know about it. I was unable to find the actual full list of shortcuts.

We can discuss here, if we should set OFM standard shortcuts by default to Krusader or we leave current shotrcut setting alone or else.


My personal opinion is "else" :). First of all, I love standards! But I *think* current default shortcut setting in Krusader is more expected by users (including me) then the standard OFM one. So i wouldn't change it.

However I think we should support switching to OFM standard with a simple action (e.g. menu action: Settings -> Shortcuts -> Switch to OFM Standard). Optionally there could be another action for setting the Krusader default. These actions would set the shortcuts just like a user would do by clicking in Settings -> Configure Shortcuts...

Now I can also see, inside Configure Shortcuts dialog is "Manage Schemes" button and Current scheme selectbox. Maybe there is a possibility (for us devs) to prepare such scheme and preinstall it so user can select it from this dialog.


Apr 4, 2018, 4:47:56 PM4/4/18
to krusade...@googlegroups.com
The full list of shortcuts can be found spread over the three documents
found at http://www.softpanorama.org/OFM/Standards/index.shtml
Specifically "OFM1999 - basic OFM requirements", covers the F1-F12

Personally I feel very strongly about _always_ following the standard.
Probably in no insignificant part and somewhat irrationally due
witnessing the horrors that Internet Explorers non standard behavior
wrought on the web.
I feel that either you follow the standard or you make your own
standard; you don't follow half the standard. In my experience having
all shortcuts be different between programs is easier to remember than
half of them being different. Muscle memory is a powerful thing.

Although your proposed "Schemes" solution is tempting I feel it is the
wrong way to do it. Partially because it is a feature few if any users
will discover but more importantly because I feel there might not be
enough developers on this project too keep it maintained. The fact that
multi-rename has been bound to the wrong key for 3 years would seem to
support that.

I would say that we follow the standard for all applicable shortcuts. If
the user doesn't like that they are free to customize the shortcuts how
they see fit. E.g by binding them too the windows standard of F2 to
rename, F4 for copy, F5 for move etc or what ever their preferred scheme
might be.
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "krusader-devel" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an email to krusader-deve...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:krusader-deve...@googlegroups.com>.
> To post to this group, send email to krusade...@googlegroups.com
> <mailto:krusade...@googlegroups.com>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/krusader-devel/9ebc695a-055b-44ed-83cd-ef3695168307%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/krusader-devel/9ebc695a-055b-44ed-83cd-ef3695168307%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Nikita Melnichenko

Apr 6, 2018, 2:49:57 AM4/6/18
to krusade...@googlegroups.com
IMO, OFM standard may be too orthodox for some people. :)
So I am also for "else" even though I respect standards.

I think we should not disrupt our userbase. I remember my feeling about
F2-F9 thing. Immediately changed back to what it was and forgot about
the issue. Just because I'm so used to old shortcuts and I use both of
them so frequently. Maybe it's just me, I don't know, but I imagine
someone who wants to switch back to old ones and have to tediously remap
everything to what this person expects. That's why I support OFM
shortcuts as an optional scheme. For discoverability it may appear on
the startup screen. We are talking mostly about new users, right?
Because orthodox people have already changed the shortcuts to conform to
the standard.

> The fact that multi-rename has been bound to the wrong key for 3 years would seem to support that.

I look at this differently. If no one complains, it means everyone is
happy or it's insignificant. And it's not a "wrong" shortcut, it's just
an old shortcut everyone get used to (in case they used it at all).
Shortcuts are a very subjective topic...

I think we should move this discussion to the user ML or a forum to see
what various users think. Users first! :)
Reply all
Reply to author
0 new messages