On 9 September 2016 at 06:42, Roland Knall <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello List > > There is currently a discussion going on in https://code.wireshark.org/ > review/#/c/17498 in regard to enabling extcap features by default or not. > > There are basically two sides to the argument: > > Cons - extcap interfaces are advanced features, which will not be used by > a majority of users. As more and more of those interfaces emerge, it > clutters up the list. Therefore disabling them by default and enabling them > when needed is ok. > > Pros - There are users out there, who use Wireshark solely together with > extcap interfaces. Lots of those users are not very familiar with Wireshark > in general. extcap was intended to bring capture device support to > Wireshark where otherwise it would not be present or very complicated to do > so. For those users to enable the support before using it seems like an > unnecessary hassle. > > I just wanted to get the meaning of the list, on how we should proceed > here, and if three are other arguments for or against enabling extcap by > default. > > To clarify, I am a Pro guy as I fear 3rd party users will not understand > this and this will lead to support cases which will generate the opinion > "Wireshark is overly complicated, let's use something else". > > I vote for disable by default, I feel that the extcap interfaces are superfluous and confusing to most of the users I support as they are for "niche" purposes.
I don't follow the argument that a user actually needing an extcap interface for their "niche" purpose will find enabling it at all difficult. If this is felt to be an issue, why not add a top-level menu for extcaps to make their control easier? -- Graham Bloice
___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe
