* Zero3 <zero3 at zerosplayground.dk> [2008-11-26 20:51:14]:

> Florent Daigni?re skrev:
>>> I'd argue for a default autorun status of "off" though, and instead 
>>> make "on" the default on the relevant wizard page, along with a short 
>>> description of advantages/consequences of autorun'ing Freenet.
>>>     
>>
>> Here you are just being silly... but let's address that on the other
>> thread:
>> http://archives.freenetproject.org/message/20081126.001810.5c2fe629.en.html
>>   
>
> Silly? I disagree. Giving the user the choice to decide over how his own  
> system runs doesn't seem silly to me at all. Not automatically  
> autorunning without the user's accept to do so seems like the proper way  
> (even though much software goes against that practice).

The aim was to reduce the number of questions we ask during the
installation to a minimum: on the basis that advanced users can change
the settings they need afterwards, including whether the node
auto-starts or not.

> Informing about  
> the performance consequences really is in place too, even if it causes  
> some user to disable the autorun. Or not?

"parse error"
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20081126/4dc4be72/attachment.pgp>

Reply via email to