Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 10:49:18 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Comments on Robert's category feature
Message-ID: <20010618104918.E28822@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
References: <EA18B9FA0FE4194AA2B4CDB91F73C0EF7A05 AT itdomain002 DOT itdomain DOT net DOT au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.11i
In-Reply-To: <EA18B9FA0FE4194AA2B4CDB91F73C0EF7A05@itdomain002.itdomain.net.au>; from robert.collins@itdomain.com.au on Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 12:38:51PM +1000

On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 12:38:51PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Christopher Faylor [mailto:cgf AT redhat DOT com]
>> I think that if we have a few categories:
>> 
>> Default (or Core?)
>> Standard
>> Development
>> Graphics
>> XFree86
>> 
>> It might help.
>
>Definately. One problem with my current code is that non-default stuff
>doesn't show unless full/part is clicked. Thats what I was referring to.
> 
>>With those, we should be able to get by for now.  I just don't like the
>>grouping of Category on the side.  I think that people will be confused
>>by it so I don't think that it is a good first cut at what needs to be
>>done.
>
>I'm confused here :].
>
>Are you saying that
>category foo (clickable to expand/contract)
>  package-in-current-format
>  package-in-current-format
>
>is good or bad? I think that would be quite nice to use.

I'm saying that your implementation of category where it is listed in a
column is not adequate.  The expand/contract thing is the way to go.

cgf