[Mageia-discuss] Suggestions

andre999 andr55 at laposte.net
Wed Oct 27 20:31:52 CEST 2010

Wolfgang Bornath a écrit :
> 2010/10/26 George J. Walsh<gjwalsh at dscvcp.org>:
>> On Tue, 2010-10-26 at 10:30 -0400, Marc Paré wrote:
>>> Le 2010-10-26 10:23, Dale Huckeby a écrit :
>>>> On Tue, 26 Oct 2010, Kira wrote:
>>>>> 在 Tue, 26 Oct 2010 20:22:08 +0800, Frank Griffin
>>>>> <ftg at roadrunner.com>寫道:
>>>>>> The correct way to do this is not a drop-down allowing a single choice.
>>>>>> It's a set of toggles for things like "hide background library
>>>>>> packages", "hide language-specific packages for uninstalled languages",
>>>>>> and so forth, with these things initially checked by default. You could
>>>>>> even have a "hide non-graphical packages" toggle - just don't have it
>>>>>> checked by default. Also, give the toggles their own menubar entry,
>>>>>> e.g. "View".
>>>>> I second this idea.
>>>> I third it.
>>>> Dale Huckeby
>>> Sounds good to me too!
>>> I fourth it.
>>> Marc
>> One word of support comes to mind for this one:
>> Essential
> The problem is:
> If you hide too much ("Programs with GUI") the forums are crowded with
> threads like
>   - "Install foo from the MCC"
>   - "I can't find it in the software management"
>   - "Did you set your media?"
>   - "Yes, foo is not there."
>   - "Did you change view to 'All'?"
>   - "Ah! Now I see it - very confusing!"
> There were times when such postings were more than 10 per month!
> If you hide too few like "All" the unexperienced user is confused. He
> will be surely confused by a list of options he hasn't any clue what
> they mean.
> A solution could be to
> 1. hide everything but the application packages (no matter if GUI or CLI)
> 2. Insert such a list of options but give it an "expert" tag.
> 3. The most important: make a search result visible also if the result
> is something which would be hidden otherwise.
> Example:
> gstreamer-plugin-devel (don't care about the name) would be hidden in
> standard view. But if the user writes "gstreamer" into the search
> field it shouold be displayed in the search result view.
> This way we could even keep the current order with "programs with gui"
> as default. When the user no searches for 'mc' he will see it in the
> list of search results, although 'mc' would not be displayed in
> "Programs with GUI" view.
> Does anybody understand what I wrote? Can't explain it in better words. :)

Seems clear to me.  That's a workable approach.
However, I'd prefer something a little different.

If the packages are displayed by category, libraries are mostly already 
separated, so they don't pose a problem.  (But my approach would work 
with them as well.)

Localisations could be grouped in a folding entry (much like 
subdirectories in the Nautilus file browser), openable with a click to 
see all the localisations.  Thus avoiding seeing more than one such line 
except when one wishes to access localisation packages.
The idea to only display localisations installed is good.  They could 
also be displayed separately from folded non-installed localisations.

We could even have a global option to display/install only certain 
This could be used not only for separate packages, but to avoid 
installing localisation files inside a package that one has no intention 
of using, thus reducing a lot of clutter - and wasted disk space.
(Personally, I don't need anything more than the various French and 
English localisations.)
This alone would be a very good idea.

Subsidiary packages associated with a particular application could also 
be folded into one line by default, as well.

With this approach, we won't need a "hide everything but the application 
packages" option, as that is essentially what would appear by default.  
"Experts" need only expand the folded lines to see all the hidden packages.

Also, we could have more than 2 levels if we find in useful in the 
future, for more finely tuning the display.
Note that in the Microsoft environment, this approach has been used for 
the installation of many application suites.  WordPerfect suite comes to 
mind.  (More than 10 years ago ;) )

In any case, Rpmdrake needs to be enhanced.

my 2 cents :)

- André

More information about the Mageia-discuss mailing list