[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Low level vs. high level UI
From: |
Jeremy Shaw |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Low level vs. high level UI |
Date: |
Tue, 24 Feb 2004 17:57:53 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Wanderlust/2.10.1 (Watching The Wheels) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.4 (Kashiharajingū-mae) APEL/10.6 Emacs/21.3 (i386-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) |
At Wed, 25 Feb 2004 01:16:38 +0000,
Robin Green wrote:
>
> [1 <multipart/signed (7bit)>]
> [1.1 <text/plain; us-ascii (quoted-printable)>]
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2004 at 04:34:24PM -0700, Pierce T. Wetter III wrote:
> > It's been really apparent to me that while arch is pretty cool, its
> > being implemented by kernel types. Which means a:
> >
> > "basis set spanning the space" user interface
> >
> > That is, everything consists of these low level commands that are
> > then "assembled" as needed. However, low level commands are not
> > necessarily more convenient. As a consequence, people keep writing
> > scripts to automate things. However, if people have to write scripts to
> > get their work done, then that implies a certain amount of failure of
> > the UI as implemented to date, and lots of cruft like -S on some
> > commands (but not others...)
> >
> > In order for arch to be accepted more widely, it has to have a much
> > smaller learning curve. The easiest way to do that is to have some
> > high-level commands that do the main tasks users actually do, with the
> > low-level commands left for the special cases.
>
> I strongly agree.
>
> I'd add a perhaps more subtle point: Tom says that 3rd-parties can
> address this, which is true - and they do.
>
> But there is something to be said for a canonical interface. Canonical,
> "blessed" interfaces are attractive for a number of reasons, not least
> that they are more likely to receive attention during development and
> are less likely to become broken through neglect.
Indeed. If I am not mistaken, one of the long-term goals of the Arch
and Pika projects is to create something name itla, which would make
it easy to write high-level, interactive interfaces to tla.
Jeremy Shaw.
- [Gnu-arch-users] Low level vs. high level UI, Pierce T . Wetter III, 2004/02/24
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Low level vs. high level UI, Pierce T . Wetter III, 2004/02/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Low level vs. high level UI, Aaron Bentley, 2004/02/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Low level vs. high level UI, Pierce T . Wetter III, 2004/02/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Low level vs. high level UI, Aaron Bentley, 2004/02/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Low level vs. high level UI, Pierce T . Wetter III, 2004/02/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Low level vs. high level UI, Aaron Bentley, 2004/02/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Low level vs. high level UI, Pierce T . Wetter III, 2004/02/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Low level vs. high level UI, Aaron Bentley, 2004/02/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Low level vs. high level UI, Dustin Sallings, 2004/02/25
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Low level vs. high level UI, Pierce T . Wetter III, 2004/02/25