On Fri, 30 Aug 2013 10:14:49 +0200 (CEST) Johannes Meixner <jsmeix@suse.de> wrote:
Hello,
On Aug 29 19:44 Rajko wrote (excerpt):
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 15:36:52 +0200 Ladislav Slezak <lslezak@suse.cz> wrote:
Starting zypper automatically looks too "smart" for me, I'd leave the decision to use zypper (or something else) to the user.
Think of it in a different way.
Majority of users are looking for performed operations, not tools that are used.
If you plan to provide text ready for copy paste, you can issue warning: --------------------------------------------------------------------- "yast -i <package>" is depreciated, using "zypper install <package>" instead. --------------------------------------------------------------------- and then install package.
This way 99% of users that follow old way, possibly following some out of date instructions, have nothing to do, and 1% that rely on some "yast -i" specific behavior have warning if result is not what they expect.
I think to be really backward compatible, there should be a popup that informs the user as shown above and waits a specific time for user accept or deny and if the timeout passed without user response the default action should be to run "zypper install <package>".
In old YCP one would have used something like Popup::TimedAnyQuestion() to implement such a behaviour.
Popup in CLI is real pain and I think we should not do it this way. Complain to stderr sounds better for me.
This way "yast -i <package>" could still work even unattended. Perhaps some users call "yast -i <package>" in scripts? This might be of importance for those users that are not yet included in the 99% and 1% above ;-)
Well, goal of yast -i <package> is install package. Thats what documentation say, so if user depend on undocumented behavior he must be prepared that it can change without big noise. Josef
Kind Regards Johannes Meixner
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: yast-devel+owner@opensuse.org