Gentoo Archives: gentoo-guis

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-guis@l.g.o
Cc: lists@××××××.eu
Subject: Re: [gentoo-guis] Why I don't like catapult
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2008 12:07:03
Message-Id: 20080402130647.7743d074@googlemail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-guis] Why I don't like catapult by "René 'Necoro' Neumann"
1 On Wed, 02 Apr 2008 13:58:18 +0200
2 René 'Necoro' Neumann <lists@××××××.eu> wrote:
3 > We just have a lack of a common base here. I can't see why these two
4 > points are disjoint. The current API is already used for a GUI - and
5 > works. The problem I see, is that you (and paludis) always want to be
6 > a little bit more fancy and more complex.
7
8 We want to provide the functionality users need to get the job done.
9
10 > > Of the Paludis clients we've experimented with, the one that makes
11 > > by far the most complex use of the API is the GUI client. This isn't
12 > > merely because we can -- the only time a GUI becomes useful is when
13 > > it offers functionality that can't easily be provided quickly by a
14 > > non-GUI client.
15 >
16 > Nope - a GUI should provide things which are cumbersome using the
17 > commandline. If a GUI offers things, that can't be done using CLI /
18 > scripts - the CLI is bad.
19
20 Realistically, there are some potentially useful things that just don't
21 map well onto a command line environment. Dynamic selection of || ( )
22 choices is a good example of this -- there's no sane way of offering it
23 in a CLI, but in a GUI (or even in ncurses if you push it) it isn't too
24 cumbersome.
25
26 > Your description is fancy ... _but_ the things you are describing is
27 > an integrated GUI. It's on the same level the CLI is on.
28 > This is nothing which is achievable with catapult (at least at the
29 > moment). Catapult _uses_ the package manager and is not part of it.
30 > Thus also the GUI would _use_ the PM.
31
32 And thus the GUI will end up delivering a half-arsed minimally
33 functional toy. That isn't what users need.
34
35 > And as mentioned in my earlier mail, avoiding the exec() stuff and use
36 > the manager itself is bad in my eyes for different reasons. And for
37 > portage it won't work at all.
38
39 You could implement it for Portage by using exec() yourself...
40
41 > Thus - I still vote for providing the exec interface. It can be
42 > dropped if a nicer solution is found later on.
43 >
44 > To sum up: I vote for the simple API - to get things done. It can be
45 > enhanced later on.
46
47 To get what done? If the API can't be used to write a decent app,
48 people are going to stick with the package manager APIs.
49
50 --
51 Ciaran McCreesh

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-guis] Why I don't like catapult "René 'Necoro' Neumann" <lists@××××××.eu>