Comment 16 for bug 306630

@Walter_I
In my oppinion, David Siegel's remark is absolutely correct, and you are wrong. It's not as simple as you put it. Whether or not copying in parallel takes significantly longer depends on a number of factors (is target and/or source on a slow network connection, am I copying from a CD or a SSD etc). Also, sometimes I want parallel copies even if they might be slower in total, to increase reactivity.

Consider the following (exaggerated) use case: I am copying a DVD image to a remote host on a slow link. ETA: 17 hours. Now, 5 hours after I initiated the file transfer, I want to copy a 12 kB ini file from /etc/ to /srv/foo. In your proposed solution, I would have to wait 12 hours for it to arrive. You can't seriously think that this would be an improvement.

I fully agree that Nautilus could be smarter during file transfer management, with a smarter queuing and priority management logic. David didn't claim that it was impossible (and neither do I), but it's not trivial to implement, and certainly not a paper cut.