On Thu, 23 Apr 2015 12:55:02 +0000 Rex Dieter <rdieter@xxxxxxx> wrote: > First off, thanks for the discussion. However, one thing I've > learned when dealing with setting defaults is this: best practice is > to never use yourself as anecdotal evidence. :) > > Now, instead of disabling screenlock timeouts altogether, perhaps we > could find a compromise... In my experience with discussions about defaults, reaching consensus regarding the best default is more an exception than a rule. The screen locking case seems a prototype example of this, and I doubt that any proposal will satisfy everyone. My suggestion, instead, is to provide functionality to enable/disable screen locking in as trivial way as possible --- say, right-click the desktop -> choose "disable screen locking". Just like what we already have with, say, widget locking. In that case, if anyone is too annoyed with the default to complain about it on a mailing list, while at the same time too lazy to make two trivial clicks, it's a PEBCAK problem, not sanity of the default. That said, my general mantra for defaults is "secure everything and lock it down, let user reconfigure at their own responsibility". Like firewalls, passwordless logins, etc. But that is just my opinion, and as an experienced user I don't really care too much about the default choice, as long as it can be reconfigured to my particular usecase easily enough. Best, :-) Marko _______________________________________________ kde mailing list kde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kde New to KDE4? - get help from http://userbase.kde.org
