As I told before I compare everything in kTorrent with uTorrent. When I look at Queue Manager in kTorrent -- I see useless thing. Queuing not useless itself, but QM is. Let's looks how queue controlled in uTorrent.
1. There is additional column with name "#". In this column we can see current queue position of torrent. If you want to see torrents in current queue order -- just click on this column. Click once more and you see them backwards.
2. Every torrent when added -- automatically added into queue. No exceptions. There is no ability to dequeue something because user can just stop this torrent. Nothing more or less. All downloads in queue and it's good. Downloads never lose they position in queue. When user stop something and start it later -- he don't need to care about position and move stopped torrent back to the top.
3. To control queue order user have two buttons on the toolbar (arrows up and down) and two commands in context menu (move up/down queue). I think 4 buttons with buttons "top" and "bottom" will be better, but it's details.
4. All active downloaded torrents stay in queue too, but always near the bottom of queue with "*" in order column. Why not? I keep all my seed in queue too (~300).
5. Only when user manually stop already downloaded torrent this torrent automatically removed from queue and in order column have nothing. If user start it again -- torrent back into queue with "*" in order column.

Why this implementation better?
1. User don't need to control queue/dequeue manually. It's completely automatic.
2. All downloads and seeds always in queue. I can't see any reason to download or seed something without queue. Seeds in passive queue and never interfere with downloads.
3. Queue UI implemented in the general list of torrents as 1 column. Just 1 column, nothing more. No additional buttons to show/hide big and useless additional window, which hog more then 1/3 of torrents list and contain... same torrents list!

Lain_13 wrote:As I told before I compare everything in kTorrent with uTorrent. When I look at Queue Manager in kTorrent -- I see useless thing. Queuing not useless itself, but QM is. Let's looks how queue controlled in uTorrent.
1. There is additional column with name "#". In this column we can see current queue position of torrent. If you want to see torrents in current queue order -- just click on this column. Click once more and you see them backwards.

Due to recent changes in the QM, it is now possible to add this. But this will not be done until 3.3, seeing that the 3.2 release candidate is probably going to be released next weekend (along with 3.1.6)

2. Every torrent when added -- automatically added into queue. No exceptions. There is no ability to dequeue something because user can just stop this torrent. Nothing more or less. All downloads in queue and it's good. Downloads never lose they position in queue. When user stop something and start it later -- he don't need to care about position and move stopped torrent back to the top.

The recent changes make the position fixed. So user controlled torrents no longer are at the bottom of the queue. However the difference between user controlled and QM controlled still remains.

The QM will probably evolve further down this path, not sure yet if I'm gonna drop the QM controlled <-> user controlled distinction. What do other people think of this ? Should we drop it and move to a QM like µTorrent ? (Possibly adding an option to disable the QM completely and let the user handle everything manually)

George,

If I understand you correctly I think your final idea is a good one. Let the QM handle it all by default (like uTorrent) but allow users to disable QM and do it all manually.

Just my opinion.

Actually, uTorrent DOES have manually controlled torrents. It's called "Force Start" which is the same as manually starting a torrent in KTorrent.

So, I think KTorrent's current behavior is actually pretty close to uTorrent's, but it could certainly use a queue order column so you can sort by it (I vote for this feature in 3.3).

I agree, this would be a good idea, it would also give some room to clean up the groups tab a little into for example all sections rtorrent has with the numbers 1-9

rtorrent has:
1 main
2 name
3 started
4 stopped
5 completed
6 incomplete
7 hasing
8 seeding
9 active
We could use 3-9 here, it would make it slick.