----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher Faylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I don't understand. Why is there an "All" there at all? The only thing > that I've asked for, and have been asking for, is clickable categories. I > wasn't asking for special "All" logic. The All is a freebie that took me all of an hour. > I thought that that I had stressed this previously. I wasn't expecting > anyone to try to add "All" logic to setup.exe. I thought you'd argued > against that, in fact. It can be easily done by 'upset'. Cool. I needed something to test my clickable categories code on. An All category was the easiest way. The second issue is that (IMO) for users, in a hierarchical environment, finding a category Full, is less intuitive than a hierarchical container that encompasses everything. I've the same objection about both things, so I chose this in an attempt to reduce user confusion. If you feel that this will cause mroe confusion, then we can reexamine things. > I don't even understand why we need multiple levels, at least at this > point. We already had the ability to put one package in multiple > categories. That's all that I was expecting. The Full category would > just be a separate category with everything in it. See above. > Or, at least that's what I was proposing as a quick fix. It sounds like > the new version of setup will have more functionality. I think it would > have been nice (tm) if we could have released something like what I > envisioned earlier. I thought that it was a relatively simple thing to > do and that it would have cut back on some user confusion. I did intend to do just that. However a couple of things intervened. 1) The categories released version of the code is nowhere near as clean internally, making clickable categories function was painful (I didn't succeed after a moderate attempt). 2) My time of late has been much less available than I might wish. Rob
