Re: gdselect alpha 3
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
> >>"Michael" == Michael Stone <mstone@taipei.itri.loyola.edu> writes:
>
> Michael> Quoting Jason Gunthorpe (jgg@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca):
> >> I think this idea of 'lets quickly do something fast' is ill concieved an
> d
> >> is ultimately going to hurt our image. I've looked at the latest version,
> >> it looks rather pretty, it's slightly more functional than dselect but
> >> that's about it.. It doesn't support any of the more sophisticated things
> >> that people are clamoring for, and it requires X, GTK and a wack of ram.
>
> Michael> But it answers the people who think dselect is ugly and
> Michael> unintuitive and want something that runs under X.
>
> A quick and dirty answers is not really a good thing, don't
> you think?
>
> Competition is fine, let it get time to mature. The idea is
> simple: no new code after freeze. let this new system vie with apt at
> the next release.
>
> Since when have we considered scrapping quality just because
> people want something that ``looks pretty''?
>
> manoj
If it's rather pretty and slightly more functional than dselect but that's
about it... then include it! Please!
What I need from dselect is more screen space, more pixels, a less crampled
selection environment. It takes forver to navigate through dselect because
of the sheer number of packages. It seems that gdselect would help a lot
in this respect (I use 1600x1200 on X).
--
Peter Galbraith, research scientist <GalbraithP@dfo-mpo.gc.ca>
Maurice Lamontagne Institute, Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada
P.O. Box 1000, Mont-Joli Qc, G5H 3Z4 Canada. 418-775-0852 FAX: 775-0546
6623'rd GNU/Linux user at the Counter - http://counter.li.org/
Reply to: