From: Earnie B. <ea...@us...> - 2008-08-25 12:23:49
|
Quoting Keith Marshall <kei...@us...>: > > Ok, if that's the majority preference, I'll go along. At this stage, > I'm more concerned that we get the design right. With the XML parser > in my prototype, it is trivially easy to create either layout, simply > by adjusting the XML, and without requiring any change to the parser > itself; I think that may be a feature worth retaining. > > Do let's not forget that we want this tool to manage all of the > packages we offer, not just the compiler suite. Is there really much > to choose between the compiler suite appearing as the second heading > in a flat list -- where the first heading will actually present a > potentially confusing plethora of all available packages -- and it > appearing as the first subheading under the first main heading? > There is nothing wrong with version 2 of mingw-get adding more complexity and allowing the user to simply configure the installer as he desires. Two screen views, with what John has now and an Advanced view with what you have. We want the first time user (and most of those are looking for a compiler) to be comfortable with doing that first install. Overwhelming them with choices that might make the experience uncomfortable is what we need to avoid. Earnie |