On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 12:45:06PM +0100, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Jan 14 10:54, Adam Dinwoodie wrote: > > On Fri, 14 Jan 2022 at 09:05, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > > On Jan 13 15:13, Jon Turney wrote: > > > > Show a MessageBox warning if we are running on a Windows version which > > > > we have deprecated Cygwin support for: > > > > > > > > - Windows 6.0 (Windows Vista, Windows Server 2008) > > > > - 32-bit Windows > > > > > > > > This warning can be disabled with '--allow-unsupported-windows'. > > > > --- > > > > > > > > Notes: > > > > Not sure if this is needed, or maybe this is just annoying to the > > > > ~3% of > > > > users who are running effected OSes. But maybe we want to annoy > > > > them > > > > into doing something about it? > > > > > > Question is, how often should setup show this message? Every time might > > > really be a bit annoying. Some kind of "I saw it, now leave me alone, > > > at least for a while" kind of function would be great. > > > > Eh. The installer tries to add icons to my desktop every time I run it > > unless I provide a command-line argument every time. This behaviour > > seems no more or less annoying to me, and I think having users see > > that warning is much more important than adding a desktop icon. > > Point.
Perhaps more constructively: I've become inured to the bits of setup's behaviour that I find annoying, and I've created my own workarounds (specifically, a bash function that wraps setup and automatically provides a bunch of arguments, including `-d` to avoid adding icons I don't want). I expect most people who are using setup have also become inured to these annoyances, and I don't think adding this additional warning is a significant additional annoyance. That said, just because I've become inured to these annoyances, doesn't mean we* couldn't do better. In particular, I think a lot of the parts of the setup UI you have to go through every time could more usefully be hidden after a user has gone through them once, and only displayed again if (a) the user requested that with a command-line option, (b) the options have legitimately changed, or possibly (c) the user clicks (say) an "Advanced mode" button on the first page of the installer. In particular, I expect the installer would be that bit friendlier to most users if the default behaviour were as if `-Mn` were specified by default every time after the first run. This is obviously well outside the scope of the immediate conversation, but I thought it worth revisiting the topic with a more constructive view, rather than my initial slightly grumpy reaction. Adam * I say "we" here; I sadly do not have the bandwidth for committing to working on even small enhancements to setup's usability. The perennial open source issue: someone has to do it, and I have far too many other things to spend time on...