Re: Debconf doesn't scale well -- suggestion
On 20-Aug-04, 17:23 (CDT), Roger Leigh <rleigh@whinlatter.ukfsn.org> wrote:
> Steve Greenland <steveg@moregruel.net> writes:
>
> > On 20-Aug-04, 11:17 (CDT), Andreas Metzler <ametzler@downhill.at.eu.org> wrote:
> >> Going back is possible if the respective maintainer-srcipt supports
> >> it. In the Dialog-frontend the respective button is labeled <Cancel>
> >
> > Because of course "Cancel" is obviously "Back", and not "End
> > configuration".
> >
> > That's a *really* bad design choice.
>
> dialog has a --cancel-label option. "--cancel-label Back" would fix
> this.
The problem is that "Cancel" and "Back" are semantically different.
But if debconf only supports one possible use for "cancel", then yes,
labelling it as "Back" would be a huge improvement.
Steve
--
Steve Greenland
The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating
system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the
world. -- seen on the net
Reply to: