[Toaster] URLs from reverse runtime deps should point to package_built_detail, not package_included_detail

[Barros Pena, Belen]

On 22/01/2014 20:29, "Lerner, Dave" <dave.lerner at windriver.com> wrote:

>Hi Belen,
>
>Another subtle case:
>
>For the included package detail, reverse runtime dependencies, there
>could be an installed (ie included) package which has other packages that
>are dependent on it.  In that case
>
>Pkg A - installed
>
>Pkg B - depends on A and is in the reverse runtime dependencies for Pkg A
>for this image
>
>The 1.1 'included' spec says that on the Reverse Runtime tab, the Pkg B
>name is a link to it's included package detail but that can't be correct,
>since it may not be included.

Well spotted! I had a bit of an internal struggle with this ;)

Once again, I used a kind of generic principle for the design, and the
principle is that installed packages and built packages and 2 different
domains. The content of one domain is generally not linked to the content
of the other domain. When we do link them, we make that link very
explicit. For example, in the case of the built package details pages when
the package is installed in a target, we show a big link with the name of
the target to signal that if you click on it you will exit the domain of
the built packages to enter the domain of the installed packages. This
might seem overkill, but what I realised while designing the interface is
that linking the 2 domains without previous warning made you kind of lost.
You were jumping to a completely different area of Toaster, with different
information, and you no longer knew where you were. It was a bit
disconcerting.

Why am I telling you all this? To explain that in the example you give, if
Pkg B is not *installed* in the image, it is not a link. In the dependency
and reverse dependency information, installed package details pages only
link to other installed package details pages, in the same way that built
package details pages only link to other built package details pages.

Having said that, and as with everything else in the design, I am totally
open to change. Keeping in mind the need to sign post where we are sending
you when you click things, if you can come up with a better solution, I am
all ears! :)

Cheers

Belén


>So it should be a link to the Package Build page (which then will report
>if it's included or note).  Correct?
>
>This is not the same case as the non-reverse runtime dependencies since
>Pkg A runtime depends on some Pkg C, so since Pkg A is installed Pkg C
>must be installed.
>-dave