On Tue, 20 May 1997, Enrique Zanardi wrote: > On Tue, 20 May 1997, Nicol=E1s Lichtmaier wrote: > > > I think that this is the kind of thinking that is killing Debian. > >=20 > > 1) Newbie setting doesn't mean annoying settings. > > 2) `real men' like you can change those settings. > > 3) Configuration packages is an awful idea that goes against the idea of > > package. A better solution would be a system setting that packages would > > check an install the apropiate default. > > 4) We aren't building a distribution only for us. > >=20 > > Let's stop being so narrow minded... We need a little of marketing... We > > need to be known as an easy distribution for newbies... > > The problem with that approach is that many of those "newbie" settings > are just a matter of taste. We don't want to set a thousand of those > parameters in hundreths of different config files that will have to be=20 > edited to reset them.
Not if we can use a config database to do most of the mindless changing of defaults. > It would be easier if all those parameters could be grouped in a > single config package. We may have a handful of those to choose > (hint: "themes"). It may even be useful for localization! ^^^^^^ NOOOOOO!!!!!!!! We should _NOT_ use this name. I hate it (and its probably trademarked as well). But I don't have a better suggestion :( However, good point. I don't like the idea of a package doing this, though. I think the best idea will possibly be to get a proper global configuration interface sorted out (dcfgtool, anyone?), and then you could do something like:- /theme1/bash/ps1 "\\h:\\w\\$ " /config/bash/ps1 not set /default/bash/ps1 "\\$ " Then, set "theme" to "theme1", and you will have your prompt as "\\h:\\w\\$ ". Set it to "none", and you get the default. Set the variable "/config/bash/ps1", and it won't be affected by changing the "theme". Nice idea, maybe we should add a scheme like this (implementation etc.) to the objectives for hamm. > I don't see the reason why you don't like the idea of Config packages. > Can you elaborate a little more on that, please? It just seems wrong to me (like having a "dummy" package which contains no files, but has dependencies). It's not clean. -- Tom Lees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.lpsg.demon.co.uk/ PGP ID 87D4D065, fingerprint 2A 66 86 9D 02 4D A6 1E B8 A2 17 9D 4F 9B 89 D6 finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for full public key (also available on keyservers) -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .