Use "Files" instead of "FileSystem" in the UI

[andyprice]

"FileSystem" is a fine name for a C++ class but it's not a normal word and looks inconsistent with the rest of Godot's UI labels. I think it would be better to use "Files" or maybe "File Tree" in the UI. "Files" would be my preference as it's simple and probably minimizes translation issues.

Current:

Proposed:

godot-2024-02-10_16.18.23.mp4

[Edit: Added a better screenshot and a video to show the proposal better]

[AThousandShips]

This wasn't intended to be visible I believe, it is just the automatic name picked when moving it to the bottom because of how that works

[RPicster]

For me, I don't care too much if it's called "Files", "File Browser", "File Explorer" or something else. I just join this discussion as I don't think changing what is written on a Label could be considered a "breaking change". What exactly would break in the engine by changing what is written on the label?

External resources or tutorials are outdated all the time - just think of all the particle tutorials that are deprecated because of the redesign which happened with a minor version change. Stuff is changed all the time and from my personal point of view: It's ok! Users know that Godot is in development.

It feels a bit like shutting down this proposal or the room for such discussions and I don't think the Godot Editor UI/UX is in a state where this is a good approach.

[AThousandShips]

No one is shutting down anything, how is an active discussion "shut down"?

[RPicster]

From my perspective it looks like the value of this proposal is given less importance with arguments that I can't really understand:
- "I'd say that's not a reason enough to change something that has little practical benefit, it's not critical"
So only the only UX changes that will be considered are critical ones? I don't think that is a good point of view to improve UX
- "Well I don't see how it's any better to confuse people with a new name and create inconsistencies with third party content etc. than to have a cumbersome but well established name"
That's a classic "we always did it this way" approach which I don't think Godot is in the position in when it comes to the Editor UX/UI.
I remember very vividly how the Blender community raged when it was changed to default left-click. But the software benefitted hugely from it.
Also things are changed all the time making third party content inconsitent. Most of the comments on my YouTube tutorials (which are mostly for 3.x) are asking about breaking changes. But people manage to understand that and those are much more complicated than just renaming something that is obviously the same thing.
- "If they're critical enough in breaking change we don't do them until the next major version, if we do them at all, when we can't guarantee stability or effectiveness of that change"
This change would not be critical, but it's also (from my pov) not a breaking change. A breaking change is a change that requires the user to change their project to make it work again. It breaks components or makes something that worked before not work anymore.

Is changing a label a breaking change?
It would make some outside references not reflect the current state anymore - but I would argue that this is true for 90% of the content out there. Like I said before, things change all the time.

So overall my impression from this discussion was that there were a lot of reasons gives why not to do it and very few answers how to move forward with it - that's why I commented.

[AThousandShips]

Well as you can see I gave suggestions, and presented my opinion on why this change might cause negative consequences, and why it's in my opinion a change with minor benefits, and as I was asked about compatibility i explained it in broader terms, please read my messages again where I clearly say I'm not necessarily against this, or think it's an impossible change, and where I suggest ways to do so that's less disruptive :)

[andyprice]

Regarding "how to move forward" - I think spreading the word to get more upvotes on the proposal is a good next step :)

[passivestar]

Just want to express my full support for this change, I explained my reasoning here, and I'm really looking forward for this to happen at whatever dev cycle it will be most convenient

[TheDuriel]

Definitely in favor of the squash in character length.

Though I'd note that a more correct label would be "Resource(s)" since Godot does not work with files, but with resources. The makeup of the contents of the File dock happen to represent the underlying file system, mostly, but is not that.

[TheDuriel]

You are confusing the ability to load a file path and get a resource object, with godot treating them as a resource.

Loading a GLTF works fine in fact, because they are resources just how png files are resources. They are registered as a resource file type in the resource management system, and associated with an resource importer and a resource loader.

.md, .txt, .json files, are also registered as resource in the resource manager, or they would not appear in the file dock, and all of them have a resource importer. Only json however implements a resource loader.

[TheDuriel]

https://github.com/godotengine/godot/blob/master/scene/resources/text_file.h

Text File is literally a resource type. And this resource is used to let you see and edit them.

[AThousandShips]

No, txt files do not have importers... But what ever, you can look it up yourself if you think I'm wrong, I'm done

Text File is literally a resource type. And this resource is used to let you see and edit them.

No it's not, it's a Resource class, that's different. It's not exposed and doesn't have a loader, it's not a txt file...

Have a nice day

[timothyqiu]

Technically, only resources are shown in the FileSystem dock.

gltf files are shown because they are recognized by an importer and converted into resources internally.

txt files are shown simply because it's a hack. There are indeed no importers, but a list of extensions are kept as exceptions. Matching files are considered virtual TextFile resources.

[tomsterBG]

I was almost going to agree, but then remembered, the File system is just a convenient, in-editor way to represent only the files that are necessary for the engine's editor. I often use .md files which are different that .txt. However i have not seen a resource called Folder that works like a folder. Given these things, i believe a custom dock someone would make in their own engine fork will deserve the name "Resources" more than this engine-specific representation of what's on your disk.

Imo, it should be "Files".

[ibito]

Even though I like the shorter name more, I think "FileSystem" is more accurate, because it's a file system inside your project, hence the "res://" and "user://" I believe.

So, if this tab ends up saying "Files" instead, I'd like it.

[jmarceno]

Files, is wrong and misleading as we are hiding files from the user and not giving it an easy way to see it. (.import and anything that is not "recognised" by the engine). File managers can hide files, but you can normally revert that with a single checkbox. Not the case here.

I like the short name. Not against, but it is wrong imo.
I would prefer Content. But I do not feel that strong about this label.

[LauraWebdev]

By that logic (that a "Files" tab is misleading since it's hinding files), "FileSystem" is also wrong.

[jmarceno]

Yes. That is why I said I prefer Content.
But I really think all this discussion over a label is very funny 🙂

[LauraWebdev]

@jmarceno I just edited my top level comment, I do prefer Content/Ressources over Files/FileSystem, since it is NOT a FileSystem/File list.

[ibito]

From the top of my head, what about "Assets"? Since everything in there is assets... unless it is not haha

[LauraWebdev]

I do think "Files" is the way to go, we don't call the Scenes tab "SceneTree" either.
Edit: After thinking about it for a few minutes, I do like "Ressources", as it more clearly conveys the information that it is not just the filesystem.

[DaisyGames]

I'd like to voice my support for adjusting the name. I think Files is a very good option, if some find it too vague Project Files would be another good fit in my opinion.

While I am sure this is a very trivial proposal, I believe this should be addressed. FileSystem (There isn't even a space between the words.) is something I'd expect to see in an alpha/beta of a game engine, not a stable release, especially in Godot 4.

Essentially why I'm in favor is that appearances and polish matter. I find FileSystem to be as strange as having a typo somewhere in the editor UI. Imagine if instead of Inspector it would say Inspctor. Does it change how Godot works? No. Does it make Godot look worse? Yes.

[ibito]

What about "Assets"? Everything in there is just assets isn't it? (Could be wrong in this assumption).

[DaisyGames]

Since this also shows script files, I don't think Assets would work.

[ibito]

I always thought scripts were also assets, oopsie! (Not a pro game dev as you see).

[tomsterBG]

I agreed with assets until i realized, in a normal project your pattern is to name folders addons, scripts, scenes, assets, resources, etc. So naming the tab "Assets" implies that it is specifically for assets, but this Files tab is more abstract than that so i think it should be named Files.

[emanvidmaker]

I propose a happy medium; lets name it 'Project` because it shows the project folder. Generic, simple, precise.

[elenakrittik]

Nice idea overall, but given we already have a "Project" menu at the top, "FileSystem" -> "Project" will cause a great deal of confusion even for long-time users, not to mention beginners and the ambiguity introduced in day-to-day speech when referring to "Project" (which one? you'll almost always have to explicitly specify).

[yosoyfreeman]

I personally don't believe any of the proposed names describes better what it is that the current one.

[LauraWebdev]

I do think "FileSystem" contributes to the initial confusion why certain file types are missing even if they ARE in the OS filesystem.

[muno777]

I'm in favor of Files. It fits in with the other tab names (meanwhile FileSystem is, unusually, pascalcase) and describes the function of the tab.

Also, the search bar already says "Filter Files"... 🤔

[dmaz]

the fact that I can add ard remove files through the base OS file explorer makes me happy with 'FileSystem', 'Files' or even 'Project Files' I'm not a fan of "resources" unless godot actually managed this structure

[peterhoglund]

Unreal - Content Drawer or Content Browser
Unity - Project (and files are in the Asset folder)
Game Maker - Asset Browser
Construct - Project
CryEngine - Asset Browser
O3DE/Lumberyard - Asset Browser
Cocos2D - Assets

None of the other larger engines calls this Files or FileSystem or anything with files. They seem to agree on Content, Assets, or Project with a strong preference for Assets.

[ibito]

Since it has a res:// what about "Resources"?

[Calinou]

This was suggested above: #9067 (comment)

[LauraWebdev]

I do like this the most, as it mentally connects this tab with the res protocol and also is a textual indicator that this tab does NOT show all files from the OS.

[azur-wolve]

also its shorter so the tab takes less space when merged with other docks

[tomsterBG]

Exactly! I have to sometimes widen the tab to disable the sideways scrolling and arrows because this works fine for wide rows like above the scene viewport, but not on narrow rows like on every side dock.

It's a small thing, but i believe people will benefit from it more than they will ever be "confused" or "mislead by an inaccurate name".

[andyprice]

One option for saving space is to change the Interface->Editor->Dock Tab Style setting to Icon Only (It's in Editor->Editor Settings...)

[scotmcp]

It makes sense, because I don't know how many times I have to distinguish between the Filesystem and the Filesystem...

"Go to your filesystem....no not there I mean in a Godot, yeah bottom left" a few minutes later, "Ok no go to your filesystem....ugh, no this time I mean on your computer, yes that's right now drag that into the Filesystem....sigh, the one in your Godot engine...yes."

[tomsterBG]

I have seen some curious alternatives to "Files", such as "Assets" and "Resources". However if you see some tutorials or download projects or even look at your own project, there definitely is at least one asset folder and a resource folder and a script folder and a scene folder. It would cause a level of ambiguity and confusion to de-abstractify the name from Files to something more concrete like Assets and Resources.

I'm in my own project and want to use the Assets dock for my scripts, wait scripts aren't assets! Art and sounds are!
Let's use the Resources dock to find my .md files... wait! Are .md files resources? Technically they can be considered, yeah.
Let's use the Resources dock to find my scripts folder... wait, are folders resources? Are they?

So all in all the way it is in Godot specifically, I believe the best name is Files. It is as abstract as it needs to be and people who modify the engine can freely make their own docks named Resources and Assets without causing ambiguity.

As for Project, there is already a Project tab on the top and it wouldn't be cool for those to double down.

There's already ambiguity with the Scene dock and the Scene tab:

Another reason for Files, it's the shortest good name proposed so far and specifically for Godot's tab system, it's best to keep names short in tall windows because they get cut off like this:

All in all, many people say many things and i believe there are way more than enough logical arguments to support the "Files" name instead of any other name. It's the least confusing, the least ambiguous, the Filter Files search will have to say Filter Project which... Filter Assets ... how's that sound? ... Filter Resources ... it just makes no sense:

Godot is different than other engines and it just works the best this way imo.

[Miku0Sama]

However if you see some tutorials or download projects or even look at your own project, there definitely is at least one asset folder and a resource folder and a script folder and a scene folder.

You guys are using folders? You mean you don't just dump everything in one folder with zero organization?

Ok but seriously, "Files" is probably the best name for it. A reasonable user can assume that "Files" is simply referring to all files that are relevant to the Godot engine and not "Every single file on you system within the project folder". But "FileSystem" definitely has a stronger implication of that, first time I opened up a project folder in my windows file explorer I was shocked to see that there was a large number of things there that were not displayed within the editor's UI.

The only other option I'd argue is equally good would be "Resources" but that's barely any smaller in width than "FileSystem" so I'm obviously gonna cast my vote for the more compact choice.