Rearranging / changing the order of the WebSearch entries does not work

[henrikgit]

Description

The WebSearch (v1.6) entries cannot be changed regarding their order, i.e. it is impossible to control which WebSearch item gets listed first when holding down Meta or if a local result does not exist.

Expected behavior

The expected behavior is the old one, that is possible to re-order (drag & drop) the WebSearch entries to control which entry gets listed first when holding down Meta or if a local result does not exist.

Steps to reproduce

1. Open albert
2. Hit CTRL + ,
3. Go to albert's options, then select the plugins tab
4. Select 'WebSearch' in the left pane
5. Click and hold mouse key on any random entry in the list on the right
6. Try to drag & drop an entry

Source

OBS - https://software.opensuse.org//download.html?project=home%3Amanuelschneid3r&package=albert-master

Debug output

$ albert -d Albert version: 0.22.0 Build date: Aug 12 2023 20:44:28 Qt version: 6.5.2 Build ABI: x86_64-little_endian-lp64 Arch (build/current): x86_64/x86_64 Kernel (type/version): linux/6.4.10-arch1-1 OS: Arch Linux OS (type/version): arch/unknown $QT_QPA_PLATFORMTHEME: qt5ct Platform name: xcb Font: Liberation Sans,11,-1,5,400,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,1,Regular Binary location: /usr/bin/albert $PWD: /home/john $SHELL: /bin/bash $LANG: de_DE.UTF-8 Language: German Locale: de_DE $XDG_SESSION_TYPE: x11 $XDG_CURRENT_DESKTOP: XFCE $DESKTOP_SESSION: xfce $XDG_SESSION_DESKTOP: xfce Icon theme: gnome 23:49:47 [info:albert] Hotkey set to Ctrl+Space 23:49:47 [info:files] Indexing /home/john

[ManuelSchneid3r]

This is intended. Fallbacks are now sorted by usage as well as the matches. This is the next generic conceptual step to allow all extensions to provide fallbacks.

[ManuelSchneid3r]

I though well this makes natutrally sense since the current usage statistically deines your future needs, but indeed I am not really happy with the approach. Muscle memory is stronger. Probably it makes sense to have a tab where all fallbacks are cumulated to let the user define the order. Ill have to use it for a while an see if my brain can adapt. Also the reception of the community plays a role.

[henrikgit]

Thank you for the explanation. You know, after thinking about it for a while, the benefit of the weighing/sorting the fallbacks is understandable.

Some quick thoughts: For the use case of

1. the usual online search for a term on $WebSearch (insert someone's favorite search engine)
   It helps a lot. The favorite search engine will get listed on top and one would be able to access it considerably faster.
2. picking a WebSearch entry for a specific problem/question one has
   It adds time because it will take longer to find the entry for, e.g., Ebay or Youtube.

Use case 1) happens more often.
Use case 2) is more in the field of "not that often" to "rarely" or "once a year, because a user wants to try it once or twice".

Maybe a compromise could be to offer both ways of sorting the WebSearch entries and let the user choose between them.

Finally, sorry, totally missed e015d5a

[AdamPS]

For me it's not working so well.

1. Even when I pick my preferred search engine 5 or 10 times, it doesn't seem to be at the top of the list. Always the list stays in the same order.

2. If I type the trigger of a search engine, it is recognised after the space, but when I type some more, then I get back to the full list of search engines in default order.

3. If I have 2 search engines with triggers starting with the same letter, one of them seems to be ignored.

[ManuelSchneid3r]

1. Even when I pick my preferred search engine 5 or 10 times, it doesn't seem to be at the top of the list. Always the list stays in the same order.

unfortunately the transition to the new search engine struct messed up sorting. 0.22.2 fixes this

[ManuelSchneid3r]

2. If I type the trigger of a search engine, it is recognised after the space, but when I type some more, then I get back to the full list of search engines in default order.

like this? do you experience other behavior?

[ManuelSchneid3r]

This is how it behaves on my machine. what is your experience=

[AdamPS]

Thanks I confirm 1 is fixed.

I found the cause of 2 and 3. Somehow my triggers had a strange character on the end that was not a normal space.

[henrikgit]

1. Just updated to v0.22.2
2. Can't speak to any new/better sorting after x times yet.
3. Can confirm the trigger issue.

Before editing any trigger:

After deleting the weird character after ama:

[ManuelSchneid3r]

Somehow my triggers had a strange character on the end t

thats just a mark that there is a space. i found nothing better. the ogham space mark ( ) looks weird as well. i though ppl may interpret it as underscore, while the bullet is that far away from a separator, that it leads to the understanding that it may serve as space indicator.

[henrikgit]

I still experience this:

2. If I type the trigger of a search engine, it is recognised after the space, but when I type some more, then I get back to the full list of search engines in default order.

for all triggers expect the just edited amazon ama one.

[ManuelSchneid3r]

Is it okay if you remove the spaces?

[ManuelSchneid3r]

just added a line that trims existing triggers.

[henrikgit]

Is it okay if you remove the spaces?

Yes, it works then.

[ManuelSchneid3r]

Update to save the time to remove all spaces

[AdamPS]

I've worked out why 2 of my searches were missing - albert is hard-coded to show only 5 matches, and I had to scroll down to see the "missing" ones. Strange, I thought I had configured 10 available results, but I can't find the option now.

The new system is annoying😃. From time to time my default search is not top of the list. So I accidentally run a different search, which means the different search has even more priority the next time. The more I pick it by accident, the worse it gets. The only way out I can see is to stop what I'm doing and spend a minute re-running the default search over and over.

[henrikgit]

I've worked out why 2 of my searches were missing - albert is hard-coded to show only 5 matches, and I had to scroll down to see the "missing" ones. Strange, I thought I had configured 10 available results, but I can't find the option now.

Oh, you're right!

Well I can only recommend to use the Widgets BoxModel for the frontend. :)

[ManuelSchneid3r]

Thats what i meant by muscle memory. This is slightly better when you set the usage history weighting roughly in the middle.

[AdamPS]

Well I can only recommend to use the Widgets BoxModel for the frontend. :)

Thank you😃

[rEnr3n]

Thats what i meant by muscle memory. This is slightly better when you set the usage history weighting roughly in the middle.

I configured my .cache folder to be mounted as tmpfs. This makes muscle memory practically useless since it's going to be wiped on shutdown. At the same time, my default search engine is not what I want.

[ManuelSchneid3r]

I configured my .cache folder to be mounted as tmpfs. This makes muscle memory practically useless since it's going to be wiped on shutdown.

i dont get the point. if you think you this affects the sorting you are wrong. the usage history database is stored in data dir.

[rEnr3n]

It's probably because I don't have much history data so I assumed it was wiped. Although I still prefer to set the order manually. I like to use my default search engine as fast as possible even if it means the other search engines require more brain processing and finger moving.