From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Kangas Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: package.el, a bug ? and a UX issue ? Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2021 22:57:34 +0200 Message-ID: References: <5A4457DF-91A4-4BBA-941C-3D53907C6729@traduction-libre.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="39456"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Emacs Devel To: Jean-Christophe Helary Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Aug 20 22:58:38 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mHBb4-000A1N-Ck for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 22:58:38 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44980 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mHBb3-0001VP-AJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 16:58:37 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:51562) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mHBaI-0000pN-Ep for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 16:57:50 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pl1-f180.google.com ([209.85.214.180]:34716) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mHBaF-0000xz-QA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 16:57:50 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-pl1-f180.google.com with SMTP id j2so2235129pll.1 for ; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 13:57:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=RZwMdEayjiImopyjA5eel8EjqdnhDx+S0nd5pg7v4J4=; b=MgUy5M1+VuShgCUko5vXqPDkolqbrZallQaRawDspcgCtMkFaxmckT1KQsU9LcNopZ UQks54NZsoiB7+/f9qXU48Q1ZaWt3cRUEQsue5+I/mX8e10yIa1X+X0vXqGgNqmhf6j8 b/Gn91XhBth4ac7An3u9DJgV64j/ZNSkUbeXcFBdlwMxcu/h4nR5kgdTm7FjZ9pdAdy8 6tt0BXRRmcveWo/pYMFAX+0qdQ5ydGvYzNER7gBWw8BZkfBDfNwEtZRClDc1fJrsehpi ge5yo8Pv6l4Y7lkF03sWk8Q9iw6NyGa0bwJSFEsp0g24QiOH5rzzLWhSd5/3gPICBsq6 4sSQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532YYA7dIMEoRk7QCLmd/HdNLAuR+n0vkPVB9tf7Mjn+aoeoA9v1 LDimI7Oe3oXEhwaPcq+sWxhvUtQUX8Yq6mkE5eo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzgEk7mK8Ske8ggei0uZcptJXDq7M7U0yLpChL7YZuZpFcpG3M/+/RBFBi4hwlYC4BlFLVg+Q1ZPpGsYk/lx5A= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:6bcc:b029:12d:79a4:58d4 with SMTP id m12-20020a1709026bccb029012d79a458d4mr18143451plt.41.1629493065800; Fri, 20 Aug 2021 13:57:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5A4457DF-91A4-4BBA-941C-3D53907C6729@traduction-libre.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.214.180; envelope-from=stefankangas@gmail.com; helo=mail-pl1-f180.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -13 X-Spam_score: -1.4 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:272744 Archived-At: Jean-Christophe Helary writes: > 1) after filtering on marked packages, clearing the filter removes the marks > > After packages-list is updated, using U marks the packages that can be upgraded and a message that looks like this is displayed: > > Packages marked for upgrading: 5 > > When I filter the list with package-menu-filter-marked (/ m) I get the marked list of packages to upgrade. > > When I clear the filter with package-menu-clear-filter (/ /) I go back to the original list *but* all the marks for upgrading are gone: when I hit x expecting to be able to install the marked packages, I get "No operations specified"... Sounds like a bug to me. > 2) The upgrade messages are not very useful > > So, the number of packages to upgrade is displayed. > > This comes from package-menu--mark-upgrades-1 which has: > > (message "Packages marked for upgrading: %d" (length upgrades)) > > "upgrades" contains a list of new packages including their new version number, but we only have the length of it. > > If I hit X now, I have the list of old packages with their old version number and a "upgrade y or n" message that does not leave much room for details. The old version number > > So, I'm wondering if it would not be a better user experience to have the U command above directly display the list of packages with package-menu-filter-marked instead ? > > That way, the user can still directly use X to proceed, or eventually go back to the package list and add packages (that's, if the issue 1 above did not exist). Makes sense to me. I'm not sure if we could do better than package-menu-filter-marked, but perhaps that could be good for a start. > Are the two points above reasonable issues to work on ? I think so, yes. Both sound like pretty obvious improvements, so patches would be welcome.