Allow resizing of panes in Paned Browser

[lazka]

Original issue 1118 created by kelletim on 2013-02-16T16:30:25.000Z:

The Paned Browser view is awfully nice to browse a collection, but there is so much wasted space in some panes and not enough in others. It'd be awesome if one could slide the panes at the sides and adjust their size. See the pic below for what I'm talking about ...

[lazka]

Comment #1 originally posted by kelletim on 2013-02-16T18:36:27.000Z:

Also, can't the track count indicator be done away with? I'm not sure what value it actually has ... it just takes up more horizontal space that more valuable information could occupy

[lazka]

Comment #2 originally posted by nick.boultbee on 2013-02-17T12:21:43.000Z:

I think the counts are very useful, especially in cleaning up your library (good for identifying rogue genres / misspelt artist names etc). Perhaps they could be toggleable though.

It does seem a shame in your case the panes aren't resizeable, though. I don't think there's a particular reason but I'll have to check.

BTW That's an impressive paned browser setup (and info area). It might be nice to get some (consistent) screenshots of your setup for the configuration section of the wiki (the extent to which one can configure views tends to surprise even seasoned QL users).

[lazka]

Comment #3 originally posted by kelletim on 2013-02-18T15:59:48.000Z:

Well I could certainly provide more screenshots, it's certainly about as "overboard" as one could go with it :). I've intended for some time actually to do a write up on using QL for classical music collections, since it's really the only thing out there good for it ... but as you might imagine, tagging a large collection to this degree of detail is very time consuming

[lazka]

Comment #4 originally posted by reiter.christoph on 2013-05-05T09:03:28.000Z:

It's possible to remove the count by appending ": " (note the space) to the tag/pattern.

[lazka]

Comment #5 originally posted by nick.boultbee on 2013-10-09T19:17:07.000Z:

I had a patch for this which was mostly functional (but a bit annoying at times), but it was pre-PyGobject and therefore no longer relevant. But it did at least prove the concept.