On 2023-02-02 22:26, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Le 02/02/2023 à 17:42, Daniel a écrit :
If I understood it correctly, the case is:
- Want to add: A
- Already added: C, D
- A depends on B
- B excludes C
- C depends on D
LyX suggests: Add B and remove C? [Yes] [No]
But probably it is the implementation that would be the issue.
The problem is when the depencies/exclusion graph contains furstrated
loops. Something like
- one has B, which provides feature "foo"
- want to insert A, which requires C
- C is incompatible with B
- of course the solution is to install D instead of B, because it also
provides feature "foo" like B does, but how to find this solution?
Automatically installing another module because it provides a certain
feature seems over the top. In your case I would just go with what the
user had done, i.e. tried to add A. So, ask:
Add A and C and remove B? [Yes] [No]
Then the user can chose [Yes] and install manually D. But I don't think
the automatic part is useless just because it does not automatically
install D.
But maybe you had another case in mind? (I don't know what a frustrated
loop is.)
My idea was just to suggest the necessary parts for the user's action
(clicking "Add").
Daniel
--
lyx-devel mailing list
lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org
http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-devel
