>>> On 11/15/2016 at 12:47, in message 
>>> <[email protected]>,
Josef Reidinger <[email protected]> wrote: 
> Hi, 
> currently as I touch warning levels in proposal clients I get idea to a 
> bit unify that levels to make it easier to use it, test it and also 
> simplify handling code in proposal runner. 
>  
> What are current levels: 
>  
> notice: only one that is not in red color 
> warning: just shown 
> error: now ask user to continue even with it 
> blocker: block clicking on Install/Update button 
> fatal: beside blocking also stop evaluation other proposals 
>  
> My suggestion is: 
>  
> drop notice level ( when passed, do not display it, just throw it away ) 
> merge warning and error into one warning with current behavior of error 
> merge blocker and fatal into one fatal with current behavior of fatal 
>  
>  
> current usage of levels in git checkout: 
>  
> notice: 0 
> warning: 11 
> error: 3 
> blocker: 17 
> fatal: 5 
>  
>  
> and when we talk about API of this call. I also do not like ability to 
> allow only one warning with level. So e.g. if bootloader find two 
> problems, then only one can be shown to user with only one level. 
>  
> So I also propose to introduce new key in description map like 
> "warnings" that contain pairs of [level, msg] so more warnings can be 
> given. 
>  
> What do you think about it? Of course old symbols will be marked as 
> deprecated and also logged that it is deprecated and removed in SLE13? 

I have always wondered about the warnings. Ideally, there would be no warnings 
as the UI should prevent the necessity.
I do have some questions though.

What are the possible warnings? 11 seems like a lot - perhaps we could 
reevaluate their necessity and reduce the number
somewhat?

Otherwise, I like your suggestions :-) 



Kenneth Wimer
UI/UX Team Lead
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 
(AG Nürnberg) 
Maxfeldstr. 5, D-90409 Nürnberg, Germany
Phone: +49 911 740 53-669
-- 
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to