Re: Although advertised on a different Cygwin mailing list ...

[Marco Atzeri <marco dot atzeri at gmail dot com>]

On 1/27/2015 1:17 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Jan 27 12:11, Houder wrote:
> > Corinna wrote (on a different Cygwin mailing list, which I am not
> > supposed to read):
>
> > Which I did. Satisfied user here. An user which never uses the
> > keep/current/experimental radio buttons, though (which I consider
> > superfluous).
>
> Thanks for testing, and that's a good point.  These radio buttons
> are rather... weird.  I think it might be a good idea to remove them.

I use it.
The only issue I find with them is their peculiar trinary logic.

In reality we have 2 questions:

 current/experimental
 update/keep

When I need an experimental version of cygwin and there is a
experimental bunch of perls (for example)
it will more easy to "keep" and upgrade only cygwin than
"update" and deselect all the tons of perls

Other layout pitfall (IMHO)

"view" button should be on the left not on the right.

"search" is in reality a "filter" and could fit better
near  "select packages"

> Thanks,
> Corinna

The new logic works fine.
I have a bunch of custom X libs for debugging purpose and
they are not automatically select for "downgrade"

Regards
Marco


PS: the cygwin web site seems very slow. Is it just my connection ?


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple