On Saturday, 4 December 2021 10:47:53 PM NZDT Fabian Groffen wrote: > On 04-12-2021 10:24:23 +0100, Michał Górny wrote: > > On Sat, 2021-12-04 at 10:15 +0100, Fabian Groffen wrote: > > > On 04-12-2021 10:13:09 +0100, Michał Górny wrote: > > > > On Sat, 2021-12-04 at 09:56 +0100, Fabian Groffen wrote: > > > > > Why don't you change your color.map instead of changing the default > > > > > for > > > > > everyone? > > > > > > > > Why should we keep a stupid default? Should we optimize Gentoo for > > > > people who don't want to be able to read Portage's output? > > > > > > You're assuming everyone uses the terminal in the way you do. I simply > > > don't think that's how the world looks like. > > > > On the other hand, you're assuming that everyone uses the terminal > > in the way you do. > > It eludes me how you came to that conclusion. > > > > No need for calling things stupid, IMO. > > > > Using dark blue on black background is stupid. > > ... then don't use black background or dark blue text? > > Now, if you would make a supported claim that all terminals we install > use a black background by default, your change becomes more valid. >
Well IMO, teal is still easy to read against a black & white background, where darkblue is almost impossible on black. This just seems like a sensible default > However, we then still don't know if people leave that default or use > something else, but we could make some educated guess about the amount > of people not changing the default. > > My point, because I think this wasn't clear to you, is and always was, > how many people is this change going to be disruptive to. And should > we make a hint to users when they install this version of Portage that > they can revert/change this by altering color.map (and how)? > > Thanks, > Fabian
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
