On Don, 2017-03-02 at 14:47 +0100, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: > On 2017-03-02 11:42, Roman Haefeli wrote: > > > > > > Proposal: > > > > First time Deken is used, it asks to install to the user specific > > folder regardless whether it exists. If the user confirms, it > > automatically creates it and download/extracts the installed > > external > > there. If the user says "no" the first time, Deken remembers this > > decision and doesn't prompt for the user specific folder anymore > > from > > then on as long as it does not exist. We would then have the same > > behavior as we do have now. > > > > pros: > > * People do not have to know about Pd peculiarities before they > > can > > successfully install and use external. > > * Nobody is forced to use the user specific folder if they don't > > want > > to. > > > > cons: > > * People that do not want to use the user specific folder have to > > click 'no' once. Is that too demanding? > > * Deken needs some way to remember the decision. I don't know if > > Deken has already a notion of remembering user decisions. I > > hope it > > does. > > > > End goal: > > > > The required knowledge to use externals successfully boils down to: > > * selecting an external in Deken > > * [declare] it within the patch > > > > What do you think? > rather than remembering the decision whether the user does (not) want > the proposed directory, i'd rather have deken remember the last used > install path. > from the user side this seems to be more what we really want (if the > user chose to not install into the default location, they must > provide > an alternative anyhow; chances are that they want to use it again; if > not they have to (and can) select a different location.
Good point. > from the implementation side it doesn't really matter whether we need > to > store a single flag or a full path. Glad to hear. > https://github.com/pure-data/deken/issues/140 What about prompting for the user specific folder, even if does not exist, and creating it when confirmed? Do you, too, think this would be desirable? Should I open another issue for this? Roman
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
