From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Jh1k7-0007ZO-OU for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 02 Apr 2008 12:07:03 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 17A1EE0C14; Wed, 2 Apr 2008 12:07:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mu-out-0910.google.com (mu-out-0910.google.com [209.85.134.186]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB289E0C14 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2008 12:07:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mu-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id i10so3975206mue.5 for ; Wed, 02 Apr 2008 05:07:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.78.122.2 with SMTP id u2mr27339211huc.38.1207138021884; Wed, 02 Apr 2008 05:07:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ( [213.121.151.206]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id i5sm5523882mue.7.2008.04.02.05.07.00 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 02 Apr 2008 05:07:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 13:06:47 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-guis@lists.gentoo.org Cc: lists@necoro.eu Subject: Re: [gentoo-guis] Why I don't like catapult Message-ID: <20080402130647.7743d074@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: <47F374DA.4050203@necoro.eu> References: <20080330005741.48243ed8@snowcone> <47EFCE30.8030800@necoro.eu> <20080330223830.739a5d88@snowcone> <47F0162B.2040800@necoro.eu> <20080401120430.7fd4e1a6@googlemail.com> <47F2427E.4070704@necoro.eu> <20080402093452.1bb6582a@snowcone> <47F374DA.4050203@necoro.eu> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.3.1 (GTK+ 2.10.14; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Graphical User Interfaces Project X-BeenThere: gentoo-guis@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-guis@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/zKulNDkLaSpqQG5rjMSs=75"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: 4674ec37-1ac6-4330-b5c4-ef0c4cbac42c X-Archives-Hash: ecdc82295f82903371068fa8da511b41 --Sig_/zKulNDkLaSpqQG5rjMSs=75 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 02 Apr 2008 13:58:18 +0200 Ren=C3=A9 'Necoro' Neumann wrote: > We just have a lack of a common base here. I can't see why these two > points are disjoint. The current API is already used for a GUI - and > works. The problem I see, is that you (and paludis) always want to be > a little bit more fancy and more complex. We want to provide the functionality users need to get the job done. > > Of the Paludis clients we've experimented with, the one that makes > > by far the most complex use of the API is the GUI client. This isn't > > merely because we can -- the only time a GUI becomes useful is when > > it offers functionality that can't easily be provided quickly by a > > non-GUI client. >=20 > Nope - a GUI should provide things which are cumbersome using the > commandline. If a GUI offers things, that can't be done using CLI / > scripts - the CLI is bad. Realistically, there are some potentially useful things that just don't map well onto a command line environment. Dynamic selection of || ( ) choices is a good example of this -- there's no sane way of offering it in a CLI, but in a GUI (or even in ncurses if you push it) it isn't too cumbersome. > Your description is fancy ... _but_ the things you are describing is > an integrated GUI. It's on the same level the CLI is on. > This is nothing which is achievable with catapult (at least at the > moment). Catapult _uses_ the package manager and is not part of it. > Thus also the GUI would _use_ the PM. And thus the GUI will end up delivering a half-arsed minimally functional toy. That isn't what users need. > And as mentioned in my earlier mail, avoiding the exec() stuff and use > the manager itself is bad in my eyes for different reasons. And for > portage it won't work at all. You could implement it for Portage by using exec() yourself... > Thus - I still vote for providing the exec interface. It can be > dropped if a nicer solution is found later on. >=20 > To sum up: I vote for the simple API - to get things done. It can be > enhanced later on. To get what done? If the API can't be used to write a decent app, people are going to stick with the package manager APIs. --=20 Ciaran McCreesh --Sig_/zKulNDkLaSpqQG5rjMSs=75 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFH83bb96zL6DUtXhERAgAVAKCYDBaWHw2wd+Qhhcau8HVFZxRaFwCgjPc0 YuFMf0p9G4eSXbdHzEDrt/E= =NhQR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/zKulNDkLaSpqQG5rjMSs=75-- -- gentoo-guis@lists.gentoo.org mailing list