On 03/02/14 15:34, Jason St. John wrote: > On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 8:45 AM, Guillaume Bouchard > <guillaume.bouch...@liris.cnrs.fr> wrote: >>> That colour cases the dependencies to stand out more on a terminal with >>> a white background. I'd say bold would be better... >> >> ;) I agree on that part. I guess the best idea must be to create a >> color class for depend and for explicit so that changing it latter may >> be easier. >> >>> However, the colour coding really is unclear. How do people come into >>> the knowledge of what it means? For example, during an update I might >>> think that a new package being pulled in as a dependency so it is >>> highlighted. Or is it entirely obvious and I am thinking too hard? > > I agree that this would not be obvious to users. > >> >> You are right. Perhaps a caption, like: >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> $ sudo pacman -Su >> :: Starting full system upgrade... >> resolving dependencies... >> looking for inter-conflicts... >> >> Packages (21): **(Explict packages appears in bold)** >> >> Name Old Version New Version Net >> Change Download Size >> >> ... >> >> Total Download Size: 154.72 MiB >> Total Installed Size: 491.30 MiB >> Net Upgrade Size: -1.28 MiB >> >> :: Proceed with installation? [Y/n] >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> ? >> >> (I had never though a *so simple* hack would generate so much discussion ;) >> >> -- >> Guillaume >> > > I don't like the idea of a caption that says something like > "explicitly installed packages appear in bold". > > An extra column would be better than a caption, but I don't know how > everyone feels about that... > > I see three ways of doing this with a column: > 1.) have a column title of "Explicitly Installed?" with a "yes" or > "no" label for each package, optionally coloring the "yes" or "no" > text for easy reading > 2.) like the first way, but put an asterisk if the package is > explicitly installed and leave it blank if the package is a dependency > 3.) have a column title of "Installed..." with labels of "explicitly" > or "as a dependency" > > Of those three, I think I prefer the second method. >
I'm not sure there is enough room for another column - especially not with a title that long. Allan