>Due to OpenBSD's excellent "convention over configuration" (1), most people 
>don't need flags.

As a brand new OpenBSD user, I *love* how the flags work in rc.conf.local:

 "" says to me that the daemon is being called with no flags.
"YES" doesn't tell me that; it just tells me that I might have to look
in another config file somewhere.

On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 5:33 PM,  <openda...@hushmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
> On 28. januar 2015 at 11:02 PM, "Ingo Schwarze" <schwa...@usta.de> wrote:
>>When you do need flags, it needs only one variable instead of two,
>>which means less complexity.
> Due to OpenBSD's excellent "convention over configuration" (1), most people 
> don't need flags.
> Your argument that the current scheme leads to less complexity is nonsensical 
> at best. Less characters maybe, but are we really joining together two 
> different variables (startup and configuration) for the sake of saving space?
> Like Einstein said, "things should be as simple as possible, but not any 
> simpler". `daemon_flags` carries absolutely no indication of whether this 
> daemon is to be enabled or not. Like my teacher used to say, good design 
> should, where possible, make immediate sense to the user (2). In the case of 
> `rc.conf.local`, this is possible by splitting the current variable into 
> `daemon_enable=YES` and `daemon_flags=""` respectively.
> As for `pkg_scripts`, I'm also a fan of the way FreeBSD handles this by 
> letting you specify `<pkg>_enable="YES"` directly in order to keep things 
> consistent.
> Having said that, this is pretty much where my admiration of FreeBSD ends :-)
> Many thanks!
> O.D.
> (1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_over_configuration
> (2) http://www.amazon.com/Dont-Make-Think-Revisited-Usability/dp/0321965515

James R. Miller

Reply via email to