That sounds good to me.  I'm no P.M. either, but I'd be willing to help
with some grunt-work.(this is becoming an itch I want to scratch. :-D )

On Sun, 2003-04-13 at 05:47, Derek J. Belrose wrote:
> I'm all for doing it this way if everyone agrees.  I think it would be a 
> decent start, definitely. 
> 
> I'm gonna head to sleep...it's almost 6am here.  But, I want to carry on 
> a discussion with you about the cli portage viewer/manager.  I have been 
> thinking about this one a lot, and want to hear other people's ideas on 
> it. 
> 
> I'm wondering if this will increase the threads on gentoo-dev enough to 
> warrant something like an IRC channel to do more of a realtime chat thing.
> 
> I'm pretty easy right now as i'm unemployed :)  If anyone wants to offer 
> suggestions on how to take this step by step, it would be pretty cool.  
> Project management isn't my forte. 
> 
> I like python...so I, myself would suggest a decent python/ncurses 
> layout for the cli viewer/manager.  I'll start documenting my thoughts 
> on this when the sun rises :) 
> 
> Alright,
> nite...
> 
> Brian Harring wrote:
> 
> >While I think an X based installer would be nice, I think we might benefit 
> >from first doing up a cli based installer first... at the very least, we 
> >would need a cli portage viewer/manager, which would be a nice package on 
> >it's own...
> >
> >Something also I thought about (and have been playing with), is having 
> >essentially a two stage process for the installer- basically everything prior 
> >to the chroot, and then everything after.  Why?  Well, it would be nice to 
> >have the first half of the installer handle all the fdisking, untarring, etc.  
> >From there, it chroots, emerge syncs and emerge portages, then pulls down the 
> >newest version of itself, and runs that.
> >
> >From there, if we wanted we could probably setup some simple equivalent of a 
> >quicky binary x server/svgalib for a x based installer.  Meanwhile, if we 
> >have at least a basic cli installer setup, that would be immediately useful 
> >for the cd's, and w/ an update capability, we could push a graphical 
> >installer down to the user once we have it ready...
> >Thoughts?
> >~harring
> >bdharring@...
> >
> >On Sunday 13 April 2003 04:30 am, Derek J. Belrose wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>The only real way I can think of is to do some checks on if X is
> >>running, and if it is, use a graphical toolkit for X...if not, use a
> >>terminal based kit like ncurses.
> >>
> >>I like this idea.  I should download a liveCD to throw some code on and
> >>do tests.
> >>
> >>Is anyone against pyGTK or something like it?  pyQT?  wxPython?
> >>
> >>Is anyone against python? :)
> >>
> >>Cedric Veilleux wrote:
> >>    
> >>
> >>>Why not simply use gentoo's livecd?
> >>>
> >>>The livecd can boot the user into a fully loaded console or X workstation,
> >>>with all the tools needed.
> >>>
> >>>The installer could be an additional tool on the liveCD system.. Anybody
> >>>knows a GUI abstration toolkit that can generate either terminal based or
> >>>X based interface, depending on what's available at runtime?
> >>>
> >>>This way the same installer could be used if X is not working or can't be
> >>>used.
> >>>
> >>>In both environment (terminal / X), multitasking would be possible so
> >>>experienced users could perform manual tasks while the installer is
> >>>waiting for input..
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Just my 2 cents,
> >>>
> >>>Cedric
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>--
> >>gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >
> >--
> >gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list
-- 
Cliff Free <anaranjado@...>


--
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list