Group and reorder the Main Menu (tabs & icons)

[davidemdot]

Group and reorder the Main Menu (File, Edit, Library, Quality, Tools, and View tabs & icons). Now it looks like on the @MartinKarim's prototypes.

This PR fixes #4666 & fixes #4667 & fixes #4668 & fixes #4669 & fixes #4670 & fixes #4671 & fixes #4672 & fixes #4673.

---

• Change in CHANGELOG.md described
• Tests created for changes
• Manually tested changed features in running JabRef
• Screenshots added in PR description (for bigger UI changes)
• Ensured that the git commit message is a good one
• Check documentation status (Issue created for outdated help page at help.jabref.org?)

[Siedlerchr]

Thank you very much for your contribution!
I only have some minor things to change, but apart from that it looks good.

[tobiasdiez]

Thanks a lot for your work on this. The code changes look good to me. I believe that removing the three tools "Opening a folder, file or URL/DOI apply" disables the associated shortcuts (e.g. F4 to open a file). Can you please make sure the shortcuts work as expected and if not add some code for this here:
https://github.com/JabRef/jabref/blob/master/src/main/java/org/jabref/gui/JabRefFrame.java#L315

I've a few questions for @MartinKarim, why he proposed certain changes (some of which are not too intuitive for me):

• "Replace string" from edit to tools & "Set/clear/rename/append fields" from edit to library (Main Menu: change Edit tab #4669): Both of these operations change field values of the currently selected entries (or all entries) and thus for me have the same quality as the "Manage keywords" feature (which is essentially a special version of "set fields"). Moreover, all these three features don't involve any magic on JabRef's part (in contrast to "tools") but they are different versions of bulk edits (but that's definitely a developer-viewpoint and not a user-centric one ;-) ). I'm fine with moving all three to "Tools" although I feel this menu gets overloaded a bit.
  Moreover, I would suggest t rename "Replace string" by "Find and replace".

• "Find unlinked files" from quality to tools: for me this feature is connected to the "set file link" feature, because once you linked a file to an entry that it is no longer reported under "unlinked files" and vice versa the "find unliked files" dialog allows to link files to entries. So personally, I would group them together.

• "New sublibrary based on AUX file" from tools to library with the reasoning that "Adding a sublibrary has a global effect on the library". However, this feature does not add entries to the current library but uses the AUX file to select certain entries and then creates a new library containing only these entries. So in some sense it is a certain kind of export. Thus, for me it should go to the export menu under file or stay in tools.

[davidemdot]

Yes, you are right, now those shortcuts are disabled. Although Ctrl + A for selecting all is still working.
In addition, I just realized that sometimes the check symbol of the CheckItem objects (Tools > Web search, Groups interface...) is not synchronized with it side panel.

I will deal with it in a while!

[Siedlerchr]

The check synchronization might be a problem with setting the values correctly in the preferences, I remember having similar issues with shown/not shown in the OpenOffice Panel. I had to explicitly set the preferences to new values.

[davidemdot]

I hope the check synchronization is solved now. Also, I have recovered the previous entry preview elements and behavior.

Please, tell me if it is OK. Thank you!

[Siedlerchr]

You seem to have a compile error now. Probably because of the parameter removal in the Check menu stuff.
You can click on the Travis failed icon and will see the jobs that failed. You then can expand them and will see the errors

[davidemdot]

Yes, my fault. I am so busy these days and cannot focus on it properly. I will solve this ASAP.
Sorry for wasting your time.

[Siedlerchr]

No problem. Take your time.

[davidemdot]

@Siedlerchr What about the coverage test? Do I need to get an equal or greather percent?

[Siedlerchr]

You can ignore the code coverage and the dependency update test.
Codacy is sometimes a bit difficult, as for some FXML stuff it is generating false positives (e.g. marking functions as unused, but does not take into account that these are defined in fxml)
We are generally not so focused on code coverage but prefer tests for the most important model/logic functionality.

[Siedlerchr]

codewise lgtm to far.

[davidemdot]

By the way, I have forgotten to say that this code keeps the associated shortcuts because those choices are also in the right-click menu.

[MartinKarim]

@tobiasdiez I am sorry for being late in answering your questions. Here are my thoughts on why I moved the items/features you mentioned:

1. Replace string: I do think that the the main difference between this feature and Manage Keywords is the possibility to change a string in all entries and not just selected ones, meaning the scope of the function separates it from the other items in Edit.
   Additionally, replacing a string is not bound to a field like Mangage Keywords or Rank entry. Therefore, it has a more general purpose, I would argue.
   However, I agree that it does not completely fit into the Tools tab as well. Moving it there was a try to give the function more exposure because many users did not know about. The Tools tab is a central part of the users' workflow, which is why I chose that tab.
   The name change for the feature is great, I think, because it matches the name of the same feature in other programs.

2. Set/clear/rename/append fields: I proposed to move this feature to library because I thought that the four functions it contains had a global effect on all entries. I have noticed, that this was a misunderstanding on my part, so I will have another look at the feature.
   But I still think, that the feature as a whole does not fit the Edit tab because of the "rename" part. Renaming is not really a content change and it has more complex implications for an entry. If the renaming function was split from the rest, keeping it in Edit seems appropriate.

3. Find unlinked files: While Set file links does only improve the quality of existing entries by associating a file, this feature is a bit more versatile. It can also help to find files in a folder which do not even have a bibliography entry yet and can even be used to extract bibliographic information from a PDF. I think that the ways of using this feature go beyond QA measures, which is why I proposed to move it.

4. New sublibrary based on AUX file: I think that you are right in regard to this function being an export function and that it could be moved to Export as well. Then it would have to be renamed though into something like "Export entries cited in AUX file". However, export has the connotation of some change in the data format, which is not really the case with this feature because it only creates a subset of the current bibliography. I found the Library tab appropriate because the feature is bound to the active library and therefore "depends" on it (and an AUX file).

I think all four points are up to discussion and depend on the view of the individual. This is why I think that especially the grouping of items in the main menu would profit from more user data to have a more objective center in that discussion.

[tobiasdiez]

Thanks @MartinKarim for your detailed explanation! That clarifies a lot for me and I'm fine with these changes. For the sake of moving forward with this PR, I would propose to

• Rename "Replace string" to "Find and replace"
• Move "New sublibrary based on AUX file" to "Tools"
  as part of this PR and then merge. @davidemdot could you please implement these changes? Thanks!

Then, as a second step, we should discuss in the devcall:

• Set/clear/rename/append fields: edit, library or tools?
• New sublibrary based on AUX file: library, tools, export?
• How to improve telemetry collection?

[davidemdot]

@tobiasdiez, I think it is done now!