Sebastian Ley wrote: > in my opinion the priority handling on errors in main-menu needs still > some work. Presently the logic is simple: Have an initial priority. If a > menu item fails, lower the priority by one step. If a menu item suceeds, > pump up the priority by one but not greater than the initial priority. > > However consider the following situation (as also percieved in an > installation-report): > > Initial priority is high. A step fails and the priority gets lowered to > medium, showing the menu. The user chooses that the failing step is not > relevant or perhaps uses a shell to recover. He then selects the next > entry. That entry suceeds again, so priority is set to high again. Which > will bring him back to the step that actaully failed, too bad... > > I do not know if we should think of an entire different solution to > handle that but for now we could add some code to main-menu that assures > that the priority will not be set >= high until the offending menu point > actually suceeded. I would like to see main-menu be smarter about the default item it picks. If the user skips over an earlier item and manager to successfuly use a later item in the menu, then the earlier item is not necessary, and main-menu should avoid making it the default again. This does not apply if the later item has a menu-item-number in the 900's (shell, etc). -- see shy jo
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature