[packagekit] Initial impressions from 0.1.1 on rawhide
hughsient at gmail.com
Fri Oct 26 09:26:13 PDT 2007
On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 12:14 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On 10/26/07, Richard Hughes <hughsient at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Do we need a "back" button or something?
> That was what I was looking for initially. But adding it implies that
> you need to keep a stack of package lists, since it is possible to get
> dependencies of requires of dependencies, and the user may want to
> step back all the way to the initial search result.
Ahh, how much would it suck to limit the "back" to one entry? A stack
isn't that difficult to do I guess, as we can just ref the PackageCache
to stop it being unreffed.
> > > It just seems like unnatural restrictions. When the treeview is really
> > > filled incrementally, I wouldn't worry so much about this taking a
> > > long time to complete. The user can always cancel...
> > Sure, but what's the point displaying 30,000 packages?
> I'm not saying that it is a very useful thing to do, just that the
> artificial restriction makes me angry.
_more_ angry? :-)
> Also the feedback is
> inconsistent. For empty search string, you disable the button, while
> for length 1 search string, you let me click and mock me. Double angry
> now. :-)
I've fixed this so that when the search is invalid the button is
> > >
> > > I think part of the problem I have with them is that they are a) too big and
> > > b) the spacing is not quite right. Compare to the nicely done progress bars
> > > in epiphany.
> > What about the attached?
> Looks better. I think I'd personally prefer the padding to be
> symmetrical, but it is probably ok like that.
I think it's my theme that's done that, as I've not added any padding.
I'll write the code for this better and then commit.
More information about the PackageKit