Mailinglist Archive: yast-devel (53 mails)

< Previous Next >
[yast-devel] Re: The Desktop Selection Screen
Ladislav Slezak wrote:
The problem is that the desktop selection cannot be easily replaced by the
selection because there are several technical and UX issues:

1) The pattern selector [2] contains the "Details" button which starts the full
package selection [3]. That means the user can also select individual
change some package management flags, etc...

That means we would need to disable (remove) that button and this would
a change in the API between the Ruby code and the libyui frontends (ncurses,

When a user clicks on the software selection in the proposal screen he
would get to the very same dialogs today already, right? Ie not much of
a difference except that the user gets the chance earlier. So I wouldn't
mind if the button stays.

2) Another problem is that after manual pattern selection we would need to
the selected patterns. The software selection can be reset later in the
installation proposal in some specific situations.

In the past there was a combobox which allowed resetting the proposal
by user, that's gone. But IIRC the reset still could be invoked by YaST
And in that case we need to restore the original user selection.

Could you detect the reset and require the user to redo the software
selection if the user chose the custom option? YaST doesn't have to
remember everything.

3) Selecting the individual patterns might a bit strange from UX POV I think.
If you choose KDE or GNOME you can still change the selected patterns or
later in the SW proposal.

Would it make more sense to just offer the "Text mode" and/or "Minimal X"
and leave the user to modify/extend that later? We would probably need to
this fact directly at the desktop dialog as currently it's not clear that the
package selection can be fine tuned (or even change completely) later...

The custom option I am asking for is basically a replacement for the
minimal X option. Showing the pattern selection as next dialog is
meant to avoid giving the impression that we want to suppress other

So the question is what is actually the use case behind? Ludwig, what
you want to achieve or what's the problem with the current approach?
The issue mentions only obsolete or unmaintained XFCE or E17n, could
we simply remove them and offer something else?

The problem with the current approach is that we don't know what lead to
the current state. Why do we list XFCE but not Mate? Why E but not Lxqt?
We cannot fill that screen with all options and we cannot fit all of
them on the DVD. So we have to focus and the focus is on KDE, GNOME and
the Server selection. Nevertheless we need an easy way for enthusiasts
to install the alternative choices. The secondary choices should be
displayed equally, we make no promises or recommend one over the


(o_ Ludwig Nussel
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imend├Ârffer, Jane Smithard,
Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG N├╝rnberg)
To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: yast-devel+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >