[Discussion] Tools > "Metacello" and "Git Browser"

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Discussion] Tools > "Metacello" and "Git Browser"

marcel.taeumel
Hi, there.


In the last board meeting, we agreed to finally do something about the current state of the install scripts and visible menu entries for both Metacello and the Git Browser. There have been several discussions on this list.

The issues I see at the moment are:

- Metacello has no graphical tool window but suggests that it has being in the Tools menu
- Git Browser, if not installed, does not reveal "click to install) in the Tools Menu
- a click on "Git Browser" will always update it (and Metacello?) before starting it, which is just unnecessary

So, I am in favor of:

- Removing "Metacello" entry from the Tools menu
- Making the "Git Browser" install state more clear (via inbox Morphic-jr.1485)
- On opening "Git Browser", avoid updating Metacello and Git Browser if they are already installed
- Maybe, for manual (or administrative) updates, add "Installer ensureRecentMetacello" and "Installer installGitInfrastructure" back to the Do menu
- revert #installGitInfrastructure to again do #ensureRecentMetacello

I still like the MetacelloStub as it is now. :-)

Best,
Marcel


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discussion] Tools > "Metacello" and "Git Browser"

Christoph Thiede

- On opening "Git Browser", avoid updating Metacello and Git Browser if they are already installed


As someone who often plays in Squeak using a metered connection, I would generally prefer to be asked whether any package should be installed, *before* anything is downloaded - what I would not really expect as this point.  Just one idea :)


Best,

Christoph



Von: Squeak-dev <[hidden email]> im Auftrag von Taeumel, Marcel
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 14. August 2019 08:53:59
An: John Pfersich via Squeak-dev
Betreff: [squeak-dev] [Discussion] Tools > "Metacello" and "Git Browser"
 
Hi, there.


In the last board meeting, we agreed to finally do something about the current state of the install scripts and visible menu entries for both Metacello and the Git Browser. There have been several discussions on this list.

The issues I see at the moment are:

- Metacello has no graphical tool window but suggests that it has being in the Tools menu
- Git Browser, if not installed, does not reveal "click to install) in the Tools Menu
- a click on "Git Browser" will always update it (and Metacello?) before starting it, which is just unnecessary

So, I am in favor of:

- Removing "Metacello" entry from the Tools menu
- Making the "Git Browser" install state more clear (via inbox Morphic-jr.1485)
- On opening "Git Browser", avoid updating Metacello and Git Browser if they are already installed
- Maybe, for manual (or administrative) updates, add "Installer ensureRecentMetacello" and "Installer installGitInfrastructure" back to the Do menu
- revert #installGitInfrastructure to again do #ensureRecentMetacello

I still like the MetacelloStub as it is now. :-)

Best,
Marcel


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discussion] Tools > "Metacello" and "Git Browser"

Jakob Reschke-2
Am Mi., 14. Aug. 2019 um 09:06 Uhr schrieb Thiede, Christoph <[hidden email]>:

- On opening "Git Browser", avoid updating Metacello and Git Browser if they are already installed


As someone who often plays in Squeak using a metered connection, I would generally prefer to be asked whether any package should be installed, *before* anything is downloaded - what I would not really expect as this point.  Just one idea :)

Sounds like a preference feature for the various installer facilities, such as Installer, Metacello, SqueakMap (if it has its own and does not only use the others). Should Gofer and Monticello be included in that list? I think not because they are somewhat lower-level.

Moreover, if the triggered action specifically indicates (in the label, not in the tool tip) to update or install something, I would not want another confirmation question after I clicked on it. Would you Christoph?

An abort mechanism during installations with a different UI than Ctrl+. might also be nice for the user experience.

If we did this in the code of the menu items, instead of the installer facilities, we would have to it again for the next installing menu items or other installing opportunities.



image.png (64K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discussion] Tools > "Metacello" and "Git Browser"

Jakob Reschke-2
In reply to this post by marcel.taeumel
Am Mi., 14. Aug. 2019 um 08:54 Uhr schrieb Marcel Taeumel <[hidden email]>:
- Removing "Metacello" entry from the Tools menu
- Making the "Git Browser" install state more clear (via inbox Morphic-jr.1485)
- On opening "Git Browser", avoid updating Metacello and Git Browser if they are already installed

+1
 
- Maybe, for manual (or administrative) updates, add "Installer ensureRecentMetacello" and "Installer installGitInfrastructure" back to the Do menu

+1 for Metacello, -1 for Git stuff there because the Git browser has its own button to make it update itself:

image.png

Also there is currently no difference between installing the Git browser and installing the rest of the infrastructure. As I understand it the only difference between the Do menu item and the "Install Git browser..." menu item in Tools would be that the latter opens the Git browser at the end and the former does not.  
 
- revert #installGitInfrastructure to again do #ensureRecentMetacello

Coming back from the methods to the GUI: one should not first have to click the Metacello button to make the "Install Git browser..." button work.



image.png (64K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discussion] Tools > "Metacello" and "Git Browser"

Christoph Thiede
In reply to this post by Jakob Reschke-2

@Jakob: You're right, there are two different aspects:


Sounds like a preference feature for the various installer facilities, such as Installer, Metacello, SqueakMap (if it has its own and does not only use the others). Should Gofer and Monticello be included in that list? I think not because they are somewhat lower-level.


This would be definitively helpful for me. If possible, these services could even check the required byte size and compare it with a user-defined treshold to decide whether to ask :) So checking for updates would not necessary require user interaction, but downloading these updates would.

Moreover, if the triggered action specifically indicates (in the label, not in the tool tip) to update or install something, I would not want another confirmation question after I clicked on it. Would you Christoph?

If the label contains the information, I would not see any advantages of another confirmation message. But as installing something would be a quite rare use case, I don't think it really matters.

Best,
Christoph




Von: Squeak-dev <[hidden email]> im Auftrag von Jakob Reschke <[hidden email]>
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 14. August 2019 15:13 Uhr
An: The general-purpose Squeak developers list
Betreff: Re: [squeak-dev] [Discussion] Tools > "Metacello" and "Git Browser"
 
Am Mi., 14. Aug. 2019 um 09:06 Uhr schrieb Thiede, Christoph <[hidden email]>:

- On opening "Git Browser", avoid updating Metacello and Git Browser if they are already installed


As someone who often plays in Squeak using a metered connection, I would generally prefer to be asked whether any package should be installed, *before* anything is downloaded - what I would not really expect as this point.  Just one idea :)

Sounds like a preference feature for the various installer facilities, such as Installer, Metacello, SqueakMap (if it has its own and does not only use the others). Should Gofer and Monticello be included in that list? I think not because they are somewhat lower-level.

Moreover, if the triggered action specifically indicates (in the label, not in the tool tip) to update or install something, I would not want another confirmation question after I clicked on it. Would you Christoph?

An abort mechanism during installations with a different UI than Ctrl+. might also be nice for the user experience.

If we did this in the code of the menu items, instead of the installer facilities, we would have to it again for the next installing menu items or other installing opportunities.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discussion] Tools > "Metacello" and "Git Browser"

Jakob Reschke-2
Am Do., 15. Aug. 2019 um 12:31 Uhr schrieb Thiede, Christoph <[hidden email]>:

If possible, these services could even check the required byte size and compare it with a user-defined treshold to decide whether to ask :) So checking for updates would not necessary require user interaction, but downloading these updates would.

I think predicting the download size would be either hard or impossible without designs changes. Metacello first has to load the baseline to see what else it needs to fetch from the Internet. That could be more baselines, which can in turn reveal more dependencies. In the case of downloads from GitHub, I think Metacello downloads a whole copy of the file tree as a zip, so once it has the baseline, it also already got the rest.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Discussion] Tools > "Metacello" and "Git Browser"

David T. Lewis
In reply to this post by marcel.taeumel
This sounds right to me.

I put Morphic-dtl.1506 in the inbox with another variation on the theme.
This keeps the Git Browser entry in the Tools menu, and requires informed
consent if an installation is performed.

Dave


On Wed, Aug 14, 2019 at 08:53:59AM +0200, Marcel Taeumel wrote:

> Hi, there.
>
>
> In the last board meeting, we agreed to finally do something about the current state of the install scripts and visible menu entries for both Metacello and the Git Browser. There have been several discussions on this list.
>
> The issues I see at the moment are:
>
> - Metacello has no graphical tool window but suggests that it has being in the Tools menu
> - Git Browser, if not installed, does not reveal "click to install) in the Tools Menu
> - a click on "Git Browser" will always update it (and Metacello?) before starting it, which is just unnecessary
>
> So, I am in favor of:
>
> - Removing "Metacello" entry from the Tools menu
> - Making the "Git Browser" install state more clear (via inbox??Morphic-jr.1485)
> - On opening "Git Browser", avoid updating Metacello and Git Browser if they are already installed
> - Maybe, for manual (or administrative) updates, add "Installer ensureRecentMetacello" and "Installer installGitInfrastructure" back to the Do menu
> - revert #installGitInfrastructure to again do #ensureRecentMetacello
>
> I still like the MetacelloStub as it is now. :-)
>
> Best,
> Marcel

>




UserDialogBox.png (8K) Download Attachment