On 23 Dec 2013, at 14:05, Esteban Lorenzano <esteba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 23 Dec 2013, at 01:17, Johan Fabry <jfa...@dcc.uchile.cl> wrote: > >> >> On Dec 22, 2013, at 2:51 PM, Mark Bestley <s...@bestley.co.uk> wrote: >> >>> On 22/12/2013 14:04, Johan Fabry wrote: >>> >>>>>> Also, I think it is very wrong to keep the images in the Library >>>>>> folder by default. The Library is "hidden" and a "black magic - do not >>>>>> touch" area for the common user. A sensible default is the Documents >>>>>> folder. >>> >>> If a user thinks the Library is black magic then they won't be manipulating >>> images outside of Pharo and PharoLauncher. (as I don't think they will be >>> capable of doing so) > > This is wrong. A mac user not ever touch his songs directly, it uses iTunes, > yet his music files are at "Music/iTunes Music”, not hidden. > Same applies for pharo images. Even if you are not going to touch them, you > still want them in a visible place (for copying, backing, sharing, etc.). Or > just because. > The default folder has to be Documents/Pharo, not some hard to access place. > > A pharo image is NOT an obscure configuration library. Is much more like a > document or a song than a preference. Ah… and vmware and parallels also keep their images by default at Documents folder. > >> >> I am a counter-example. *I* think the Library is black magic and I >> manipulate images in the finder. >> >>> I think this is a misreading of Apple's directory design. It is for more >>> than preferences and caches but for all app-specific files >> >> I am not knowledgeable on the design intent of Apple. I am just a user, and >> looking at what is inside the Library folder is scary. I have no documents >> of mine in there. >> >> I will stop here, I think I made my point. Feel free to disagree :-) >> >> ---> Save our in-boxes! http://emailcharter.org <--- >> >> Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry >> PLEIAD lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile >> >> >
