Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: setup (2.895)

[Jon Turney <jon.turney@dronecode.org.uk>]

On 18/01/2019 23:58, Tony Kelman wrote:
>> - Drag setup into the 1990s, by replacing the custom-drawn package
>> chooser with a ListView common control.
>>
>> -- Use standard UI elements to choose an action to take on a package or
>> category, rather than the weird UX of clicking to cycle around a list of
>> options of undisclosed length.
>>
>> -- Behaviour change: previously, a category action only affected
>> packages which matched any name search filter applied.  Now all packages
>> contained by the category are affected.
> 
> I noticed a behavior change that felt like a regression to me, could you
> clarify whether or not it falls under the intended new behavior?
> 
> With previous versions of setup you could use the category view and select
> "Install" for the "All" category and get a (slightly crazy, not-recommended)
> conflict-free package resolution to install.
> 
> With 2.895, now the selection for the "All" package applies even to the
> default-hidden "_obsolete" category, resulting in over 100 conflicts
> between obsolete packages and their successors. Should selections on the
> "All" category follow the setting of the "Hide obsolete packages" checkbox?
> 
> I'm not sure if this is how older setup versions worked, but it might make
> sense to not propagate selections from "All" to the "_obsolete" category
> when that checkbox is enabled.

Thanks for reporting this issue.

As mentioned, previously the propagation was (accidentally?) coupled to 
the visibility of packages, whereas now it applies to all packages 
(including those invisible because they are in the obsolete category)

So yeah, the behaviour of "All" category now is not very useful, and 
needs fixing, probably in the way you suggest.

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple