[Aptitude-devel] Bug#626829: "Current status" looks like an error warning

[Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo]

2015-09-10 12:43 GMT+01:00 Sami Liedes <sami.liedes at iki.fi>:
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 12:14:29PM +0100, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote:
>> > Isn't it bad to output something the user doesn't understand even if
>> > they didn't use -v?
>>
>> I disagree with users not understanding that, or that being a big
>> problem.  The first message, "There are 0 new [-1]", is specially
>> cryptic, and I agree that "[-1]" can be taken for an error.
>
> FWIW, the new changes look very good to me; they are understandable.
> Also, I agree that using (-1) instead of [-1] clarifies a lot.

Good to have the confirmation, thanks.  (Although I am not sure if
it's universal).


>> But if one is used to aptitude, and apt and Debian terminology in
>> general, talking about "new", "upgrades" or "upgradable", and
>> "obsoletes" should not be too alien. In the curses interface there are
>
> I can figure out what new, upgradeable and obsoletes are, but WTH are
> "upgrades"? I can understand how a package can be new, upgradeable or
> obsolete, but not how it can be an upgrade.

Just a guess, but I think that "updates" or "upgrades" vs
"upgradeable" was because the writer thought about implicit
"available" and "packages", something like:

  "Current status: 34 package updates available [+5], [5] new packages
available [+3], 0 broken packages [-1]".

... but then cutting out words from where they were less critical,
removed because it looked redundant, or to keep the phrase short, or
for reasons of translation (explained in other bug reports).


>>   Fetched 617 kB in 12s (51.3 kB/s)
>>   Current status: 287 (+4) updates, 4629 (-3) new.
>>
>> ...it is not a big stretch to imagine that there are 4 new updates
>> available, and a total of 287 not updated (because I know that I
>
> Doesn't "update" in apt(itude) terminology mean refreshing the package
> list, and "upgrade" installing a newer version of a package?

Yes, that's a good point.  "upgradeable" is better and more consistent
with aptitude, apt and general Debian terminology -- I suppose that
that's the reason why I actually wrote "upgradeable" when the "Current
status" message actually says "updates".

So I will change "update(s)" for "upgradeable".


>> And even if after that the user doesn't understand after a while what
>> the numbers mean, they can be safely ignored.
>
> The problem with not understood messages is that if you don't
> understand them, you don't know if they can be safely ignored. But, as
> I said, I agree that the tiny change solves this entirely for me. Good
> job :)

Thanks!

-- 
Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <manuel.montezelo at gmail.com>