Mail Archives: cygwin-developers/2001/06/21/02:53:10
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:cgf AT redhat DOT com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 2:17 AM
> To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
> Subject: Re: Comments on Robert's category feature
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2001 at 12:33:55PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
> >BTW: I'm about 50% through to doing the updated screen Chris
> suggested.
> >I think that a third view, that selects the metapackages only will be
> >quite useful (ie show
> >Development
> >Workstation
> >Server
> >and just let the user choose one of those) but one thing at a time.
>
> I don't think that this view is useful. I forsee people
> installing the
> Workstation being confused by the lack of inetd due to a
> misunderstanding
> of the term Workstation.
Ok. I wasn't trying to imply that Workstation include/not include any
specific packages, but I was trying to imply that this would allow
packages to "appear" in multiple places without confusing folk.
> I don't think that we need something beyond a category level
> which shows
> generic things like "Development", "Shell", whatever.
>
> I think that some programs should live in more than one
> category, though.
> The current implementation doesn't allow that.
I still don't agree that this is necessary, but I'll code it in anyway.
I think people will be confused "why does inetd appear under foo and
bar? Are they different? Why does the first one not install when I click
skip for the one under category bar?"
> I wonder if we should maintain a category array which points to a list
> of things in the category.
I've got that here. I didn't use an array, but I can convert it to that
if what I submit doesn't look good. (I needed a list of all the
categories so that I can do the tree view).
Rob
> cgf
>
- Raw text -