Pls. see a screenshot for komodo 9 (with right and left padding)
and komodo 10 (with no right and left padding)
also icons in 10 are smaller and the result is a cluttered tab line, it’s very unpleasant to try and find a tab there. It’s also more difficult to hit the x when you need to close a tab.
Also somewhat related: opening a file in a new project:
Komodo 9:
Komodo10:
In the beginning I thought something was broken, see the wide space between the button and the corresponding menu? It looks like the menu relates to the “open project” button, which is located beneath the “open file” one.
You have probably some reason for this, but seen from my point of view as a user, I really don’t get it: a folder is a folder; you have folder icons elsewhere in the GUI, why not using it every time there is a folder. Why should I use energy to:
- get used to a different icon for the same thing going from IDE version 9 to version 10.
- Get used to discern when a folder is hidden behind a folder icon and when it is hidden behind a > icon.
I don’t see the problem that you are trying to solve for me in return for the inconveniences that you are imposing to me.
It’s just: if it ain’t broken, don’t fix it.
I’m uploading a screenshot for that:
Is it possible to force the text being white when it is highlighted? That would solve it.
Maybe you have misunderstood me on this point. I have chosen a “classic” interface and have not customized it on purpose, because, next time you come up with a new major version I will probably have to do it all over again.
I did customization with version 9, triggered by the fact that you had made the location pane brighter than the code pane: when I first saw it, I thought my sight was suddenly become bad, realized then that the culprit was the grayish background of the code pane, and the contrast to the brighter location column. So i started finding colors that were good enough for me (looked like those I had in version 8), when I was (almost) satisfied, the version 10 came about, and I had to start all over again. Now I would prefer not having to customize however nice the result might become. A decent starting point should be a reasonable requirement, at least texts should be readable and somewhat standard padding too.
The idea that I can customize the css to my liking is cool enough, but please do not use it as an excuse not to provide good enough interface. When I make website for my clients I use libraries so that I don’t need to think about a decent starting point, the lesser I want to spend my time tinkering the css of a tool that I have payed for just to be able to read a text.
OK, I got this: until now I’ve always worked with “remote folders” residing on a different box than my PC. So the project definition files were saved in one folder on my local machine, one single folder keeping subfolders, one for each of the different projects. The “close files when closing project” feature worked in that case, even if the (remote) files had no relation to the location of the project definition file. Now I’m working on a project whose working files are kept inside my PC and I still keep the project definition file in the same folder where I have all my other project definition files. This is of course unrelated to this particular project. I didn’t know it was a constraint to make this work.
Apparently when working on remote folders the constraint does not apply.
Could it be a feature request that a project does not need to be placed in a subfolder of where the project file is saved?