Mail Archives: cygwin-apps/2001/11/19/22:03:59
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2001 at 01:41:43PM +1100, Gareth Pearce wrote:
> >> Thanks for playing along. In other words, this problem has nothing to
> >> do with what we're talking about.
> >>
> >> We could have the problem of conflicting files no matter what we do.
> >>
> >> You're arguing that we can't use the word "All" because someone will
> >> be upset when gvim isn't installed.
> >>
> >> Ok. I'm arguing that you can't use the word "Workstation" because
> >> someone will be upset when gvim isn't installed.
> >>
> >> There's no difference.
> >
> >I am going to disagree here. When someone is upset because "All" doesnt
> >install gvim, I would think they have a point. When someone is upset
> >because "Workstation" doesnt install gvim, I dont think they have a valid
> >point.
>
> I already said we don't have to call the category "All". Did you
> miss that part?
I appear to have been confused. Where I was talking about All ... I was
relating to a 'button' or some kind of selector at the top of the screen.
Not a meta-package/category called All. This second case I was indeed aware
of your comment that you didnt have to call it All, but then I also was
under the impression that you didnt think that the meta-package idea was
nescerly a good one in the first place. Therefore I assumed that in this
case you were talking about a button of some kind. As I am mistaken the
point is moot.
>
> This proposed plan would first present you with the opportunity to
> select "Workstation" and then you'd get another screen. Hmm.
> Development. Does this mean "Workstation Development"? Does it mean
> "All of the development tools that make sense for a Work Station"?
Again wires are crossed here, I was not talking about the additional screen
method - which I thought had been shot down rather quickly and didnt bare
continuing discussion.
*then again I also didnt think you would be haing multiple screen choices in
that model either* ... Irrelivent since that idea isnt going anywhere.
>
> >Workstation is a custom set of choices, its going to not nescerly do
> >what you want... you fine tune such things yourself post fact. All -
> >implies all ... I dont really see anyway of it meaning anything else.
>
> Sigh. Somebody shoot me, please.
>
> I am really sick of these setup discussions.
*Sigh* given the number of ways in which everyones missinterpreteing
everyone ... perfectly understandable...
I should really be studying anyway...
Ignore my other email - since its not going to help.
Gareth
- Raw text -