[Toaster] [RFC] Image customisation detailed design

[Barros Pena, Belen]

As I mentioned in the Toaster weekly meeting last Wednesday, I've recorded
a (not so short, sorry) video showing a much more detailed design for the
image customisation feature. The video is here

https://wiki.yoctoproject.org/wiki/images/a/a1/Image-customisation.webm

Everything that I show in the video is now available in the design
prototype at

https://yoctoproject.org/toaster


Just in case you want to follow along ;)

I think the design addresses pretty much all the feedback the Toaster
contributors have provided so far (listed below). The only items not
addressed are 1 (because it would require us to rethink Toaster as a tool
for absolute beginners and would impose a very specific workflow) and 8
(because I haven't had time to think about how we can do this, but we can
definitely come back to it).

Please send any comments and new feedback to the mailing list so that
Tiago can collect it and we can address it.

This is the feedback we have received so far:

1. Should this kind of linear process be the main Toaster workflow,
instead of the non-linear one currently provided by the existing project
page?

2. Size is project configuration dependent, so all size information is a
guess, an approximation. We should probably still show it, but the
interface needs to present it as such (we need to make sure we don't
present it as it was 100% accurate information). The same for dependencies.

3. We need to create states for how the tables will look like when certain
information is missing (number of packages, sizes, etc)

4. We need to refine the recipe presentation in the workflow

5. We need to work on the way we present the actions. Do we really need
all the ones we have right now?

6. Replace the builds tab with a less prominent way of accessing build
information for the custom image recipe.

7. Provide a way to reenter the image customisation process from the build
results

8. Provide a way to 'select all' packages returned by a search

9. Do we need the reverse dependencies information in the packages table?

10. Can we add the package size to the visible dependencies information in
the packages table?

11. The workflow is still too complex: too many concepts exposed
(packages, layers, recipes). Should we just require people to build the
image they want to customise instead?

Cheers

Belén