On Sat, Jan 22, 2000 at 03:49:54PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote: > This is an ongoing peeve I've developed over the last couple of > years. We seem to spend a *lot* of time arguing about default > configuration, after spending a big effort making sure our system > preserved configuration changes. Despite that effort, there seem to > be a lot of people (not pointing a finger at anybody involved in > this discussion now) who won't be happy unless all their particular > configuration choices catered to in the default installation. The > reality is that sometimes there is no best choice, and therefore the > maintainer gets to make the call about what the default should be. > If you don't like the defaults, read the manpages and change the > config. Now, if the package upgrade stomps on your changes, you have a > reasonable beef with the maintainer. Otherwise, what's the big deal? I mostly agree with you, as long as the defaults are the most secure possible. There is often a lot of "my personal configuration is the best" running around. On the other hand, people do sometimes have some neat ideas that could enhance a package. I'm not sure of the best way to both encourage creative input and squash useless bickering, unless it is to increase the spirit of cooperation and teamwork in the project. -- Mike Stone
Attachment:
pgpfbQBjfINVD.pgp
Description: PGP signature