From owner-freebsd-chat  Sun Aug 31 17:06:06 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-chat>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id RAA24990
          for chat-outgoing; Sun, 31 Aug 1997 17:06:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from word.smith.net.au (ppp20.portal.net.au [202.12.71.120])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id RAA24985
          for <freebsd-chat@freebsd.org>; Sun, 31 Aug 1997 17:05:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from word.smith.net.au (localhost.smith.net.au [127.0.0.1])
	by word.smith.net.au (8.8.7/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA04315;
	Mon, 1 Sep 1997 09:33:41 +0930 (CST)
Message-Id: <199709010003.JAA04315@word.smith.net.au>
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0zeta 7/24/97
To: John Fieber <jfieber@indiana.edu>
cc: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>,
        Peter Korsten <peter@grendel.IAEhv.nl>, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: sysinstall (was Re: Conclusion to "NT vs. Unix" debate) 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 31 Aug 1997 18:31:23 EST."
             <Pine.BSF.3.96.970831175422.307J-100000@fallout.campusview.indiana.edu> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 09:33:35 +0930
From: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au>
Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> On Sun, 31 Aug 1997, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> 
> > Let's take sysinstall for example, something which you say has a
> > confusing GUI with a poor selection model.  I agree with you.
> > sysinstall's UI is a festering heap of trash which annoys me, its
> > principle author, probably more than anyone.  Why is it so evil?
> > Because it uses libdialog(3) and a series of hand-rolled curses(3)
> > screens, the many limitations of those stemming from the general
> > unwieldyness of curses programming and my lack of time to sit down and
> > write a whole bunch of advanced curses widgets like scrolling list
> > boxes or expanding lists.
> 
> Indeed there are numerous mechanical glitches in the interface
> that are annoying and can be attributed to a less than stunning
> UI library, but some larger scale navigation problems are not
> really toolkit related.
> 
> Particularly disorienting is the behavior of the "Cancel" 
> buttons, or the lack of a "back" button.

These are also "features" of the UI, believe it or not.

> When proceeding through
> the various setup screens, if a mistake is made you usually end
> up going right back to the start and have to proceed through the
> whole process again.  A "back" button also provides the essential
> ability to review the installation options before pressing the GO
> button. 

As an issue of curiosity, and for general review does the sequence :

 - step sequentially (in some hopefully logocal order) through all the
    required configuration dialogs
 - present the gathered information in summary form, with functionality 
   to jump immediately to a particular editing screen if a parameter is 
   found to be wrong (by the user)
 - offer a proceed/cancel selection

come closer to the ideal for the gather/review/confirm cycle?

mike