On 25/03/16 11:06, Xavion wrote: > Hi Allan, > > I have become old and grumpy since then! >> > > Okay, point taken: I did let it drag on a bit. It wasn't all my fault, > though: I got sick of waiting for those other three patches to be merged in. > > >> Lets start with what is already justified by what we already have in >> pacman with the aim of improving consistency of our current colour >> scheme. Further additions will need to be discussed separately. >> >> package names - bold (in some places...) >> groups - blue >> repos - magenta >> versions - green >> >> So, I'd like separate patches: >> >> -Si/-Qi: just those changes >> -S group dialog: just those changes >> > > Righto, you're the boss. I've just created a patch for those switches > alone; I will post it to this thread soon. I'll get back to you about the > other colours at a later date. > > >> -Qo/-Fo can have the same done >> and anywhere else that is currently not consistent. >> > > As far as I can tell, the following switches need better colourisation. > Let me know if you disagree with any of this *before* I go ahead and create > the patch :-). > > - -Dk, -Dkk: the package name (but not the dependency) should be in > bold, rather than quoted
Colour adds nothing here > - -Qc: the package name should be in bold, rather than quoted or here... > - -Qg, -Sg: the group name should be in blue; the package name should be > in bold or here... You don't need colour to distinguish between left and right columns. > - -Qk, -Qkk: the package name should be in bold Only errors/warnings are highlighted. Adding more colour hides the important information > - -Qo, -Fo: the package name should be in bold; the version number > should be in green I said this was fine above. > - -Qq, -Fq, -Sq: the package name should (possibly) be in bold Not sure what package name you are referring to. > - -T: the package name should (possibly) be in bold No colour here ever.
