From: Keith M. <kei...@us...> - 2008-08-25 14:08:03
|
On Monday 25 August 2008 13:23:43 Earnie Boyd wrote: > 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. As I visualise it, what the user sees will be configured via a master software catalogue, specified using XML elements, and maintained not by the user, but by our package maintainers; I don't want to have to maintain two variants of that, so we can have... > 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. I agree, but I think you are missing my point; if we get the internal design of the XML parser right, then the view can be appropriately controlled *entirely* by the XML, *without* any need to modify the C++ coding of the parser. It isn't difficult to support that; I've already provided an example of a suitable parser, which can support either style, out of the box. > Overwhelming them with choices that > might make the experience uncomfortable is what we need to avoid. Agreed, but I fail to see how John's design, with the default view of `All' -- that is the kitchen sink view of *everything* available on the download site, *not* just the compiler suite -- can meet that objective better than my `Base System / MinGW Compiler Suite' view, which shows *only* what is required to get a working compiler. In both cases, the user needs to choose the second visible heading, to get a selective view of just what he is looking for. Given that initial choice of *everything* vs. a shorter list of just what I need, I know which I would find the more intimidating; (I'm sure I would feel much more comfortable with the shorter list). Users should not feel alienated by a tree view -- after all, that is what Windows Explorer uses. Maybe an alternative name to `Base System' would make it more obvious that it is where new users should look first. Whatever it is called, it would be the initial heading displayed, when mingw-get starts, and can be made an active selection by default; we could even arrange to have it associated with `hint' text, (in the bottom right textbox control), to guide first time users in the right direction. How can that possibly be more intimidating that a default view of every package available, without the slightest hint of what is needed, just to keep a monolithic categories list in preference to something more structured? IMO, there is no way that it can be. Regards, Keith. |