[Patch] setup.exe - no skip/keep option buggyness
Brian Keener
bkeener@thesoftwaresource.com
Fri Oct 5 12:03:00 GMT 2001
Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2001 at 09:33:50AM +1100, Robert Collins wrote:
> >I'm happy for this to be debated to death for the HEAD branch though.
> >I'm not convinced that having a separate skip/keep for the user makes
> >sense, but then I'm not convinced that a spin control is best their
> >either..
>
> FWIW, I agree on both counts.
>
> cgf
>
Just to throw my two cents worth in - I kind of like the keep/skip and the spin
control. The keep/skip makes perfect sense to me - I have a package listed in
the installed column of choose and I select keep - I want to keep that version
installed. I have nothing displayed in the installed column - I select skip -
I still want nothing installed, in my way of thinking. I would not select
"keep" if I had nothing of that package installed anyways. I am not saying you
should ever have both options, that is a definite no-no but one or the other in
the right cases makes seems right to me. I would/could select "skip" if I did
have the package installed and it would make sense but I think if something is
installed then "keep" really makes better sense. It is still all semantics -
ultimately behind the scenes they accomplish the same thing, but we do need to
think of the clarity for the novice.
As to the spin control, I like it - but everyone elses discontent with it makes
me ask - what do you envision in its place - I might like that better.
bk
More information about the Cygwin-patches
mailing list