Manoj Srivastava wrote: > Hi, > >>"Michael" == Michael Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Michael> Quoting Jason Gunthorpe ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > >> 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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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/