[packagekit] Initial impressions from 0.1.1 on rawhide

Richard Hughes 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.

Thanks again.


More information about the PackageKit mailing list