| 1 |
On Thursday 08 January 2004 00:01, foser wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, 2003-12-30 at 09:13, Jason Mobarak wrote: |
| 3 |
> > The current portage spec lists a component based design as goal for |
| 4 |
> > portage, constructing an i18n emerge-like tool would present less |
| 5 |
> > difficulty if portage-ng has a good component design. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> For a front-end it would be easier, but to have all messages in the |
| 8 |
> components themselves i18n requires an effort from the very beginning. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Regardless of i18n, isn't it good design to have all user interaction done in |
| 11 |
one place? Specifically, shouldn't any messages/errors/etc be passed back to |
| 12 |
the user interface using exception-like mechanisms? Not only would it make |
| 13 |
i18n a lot easier, it doesn't inhibit possible uis. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
-- |
| 16 |
Regards, |
| 17 |
Jason Stubbs |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
-- |
| 20 |
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives