On 02/04/2011 00:45, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
Martin schrieb:
If a global config is found, but is invalid/incompatible, a local
config should be created.
sounds good at first, but is actually worse.
Because this behaviour is unpredictable from the end users view.
Unpredictable why?
Because as I wrote a line further down:
"Rules for "invalid/incompatible" may be complex. They may not always
apply, even if the user hopes for. "
Also I wrote "from the end users view. "
Someone knowning all the "rules" can predict, if the current config is
"invalid/incompatible" or not.
But a "normal"/"les experienced" end user will not be able to predict
that, for him it will look random what happens.
Note: I never said the current solution was perfect. But it doesn't need
replacement by something that isn't any better.
Currently the results are unpredictable, when the IDE finds a config
unusable, or does not find out, and produces consequential errors :-(
apparently it now comes up with one single setup dialog...
Rules for "invalid/incompatible" may be complex. They may not always
apply, even if the user hopes for.
In fact they may change, later. 2 installations that have shared the
global conf for a long time, may become "invalid/incompatible" at
some point (maybe only for a short time) => but then all the sudden
one of them has a conf in the exe-dir => not good at all.
It's up to the inventors/maintainers of the config thingy, to provide
checks and solutions. I only can assist in improving the current state.
E.g. split the config into an always compatible (user preferences),
and an installation specific part. This will allow to retain as much
of the settings as possible, in case of problems somewhere else. Next
offer the user a menu item, to save the config into the Lazarus
directory (current scp), and later load from that location whatever
config files are found there, before loading missing files from other
locations.
splitting may be a good idea. but is a new topic
The requirement for an explicit -pcp can be reduced to the single
invocation, that shall create a new config. This job also could
become a menu option, or an option button in the IDE settings
dialog. Why press the user to specify a new pcp at the commandline,
when the config always is created by the started IDE?
the requirement to create a script, is a single invocation too...
where is the difference?
a profile manager, selectable from menu, could create this script for
you (or the windows shortcut). Again where is the difference?
The difference is, what the user must know about the script. When the
IDE creates it, the user only has to know about the invocation of the
script (filename or desktop icon), not about the contents of that script.
Sorry, but I am not sure what you mean. Isn't that the idea of a script,
just run it?
-----
btw , whith config in the exe dir => it can get really fuzzy.
if you have a link (or shortcut) to your exe, and there is config in
the real exe-dir, and the link-dir... which one to take?
Then it's up to the creator of that link, to make it work as it should.
That wasn't the question. How should it?
Windos "links" (desktop shortcuts) allow to specify the working
directory, so it's up to the creator of the link to fill in that
information. Console users on any system may create an equivalent
script, and create links to that script instead of to the executable.
Ok, "creator"? The end user, or the lazarus developper?
if the end user, then that is the same as --pcp, or scripts, the user
has to set it up onc
if the laz-developer, then tyes, it is easy to implement some rule, but
the bigger the set of overall rules grows, the more confusing for the
usser...
Martin
--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
