Re: weft 0.4

[Dave <kilroyd at googlemail dot com>]

Frank Fesevur wrote:
> At 30-10-2006 18:12, Dave wrote:
>> Comments on the package itself:
>> 2. You have hardcoded the bash invocation line.
> 
> Sorry, but I don't understand it. I think it is because English is not
> my native tongue, but what do you mean with "bash invocation line"?

I meant the string you put into the registry to call bash.

>>   c) I don't think this plays well with spaces or '$' in a path (but I
>> could be wrong). Note '$' is commonly found in MS hidden network shares.
> 
> It is no problem to start a script when spaces in the filename. I just
> tested and indeed it does not work when the script is on shares.

Thanks for the clarification - I didn't get a chance to run weft.

>> My feeling is that we need to have a single package which manages all
>> the explorer extensions anybody may want to add. I don't think the
>> package as proposed can easily be made to do this.
> 
> Sounds like a good idea to me.
> 
>> I have a work in progress which could do the generic management of
>> explorer extensions (see link below). As is typical, I haven't had time
>> to perfect it - but by all means, have a look at what I've done and
>> between us we might get this functionality into cygwin.
> 
> I don't mind to drop weft and help to make the new package. My reason to
> write is, was to have the functionality. It doesn't have to be weft if
> there is another/better way to do it.
> 
> I will definitely take a closer look at your code.

Since I posted it, I've a few minor modifications - but it should be
usable for simple cases. As posted it retains some of th drawbacks I
highlighted in weft, but ther is a clear path to address most of the issues.

I look forward to hearing your comments on it.  In the meantime, I'll
see if I can find time to work on it, and maybe post an update/actual ITP.

Dave.