On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 11:48:24AM -0700, Garrick Staples wrote: > On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 09:25:10AM -0700, Michael Stenner alleged: > > On Sun, Aug 22, 2004 at 11:01:34PM -0700, Garrick Staples wrote: > > > On Sun, Aug 22, 2004 at 11:00:42PM -0700, Garrick Staples alleged: > Playing devil's advocate for mandatory options... duly noted > it would *force* people to RTFM. The natural inclination of most > users is to just try the most obvious solution before RTFMing. If > you, one of the developers, understands that the user is going to > miss vital information and that RTFMing will avoid landing the > bullet in his/her foot, then forcing the user here is a good thing. I take a rather libertarian position on this one. I want developers to provide a good program and good documentation, but then leave me to behave however I want. I don't mind warnings that it will "eat your brane" if you don't RTFM. I _DO_ mind people attempting to adjust my usage patterns to meet their ideals, even if their intentions are good. Also, in practice, you're more likely to get a lot of newbies bitching, a lot of responders telling them (in roughly equal parts) to RTFM or "just add this to your config file:...". > Wider commentary... I think this point's to one of yum's wider > problems: lack of focus. I asked once before (a long time ago), if > yum was a convienence tool to help out new users or if it was a > power tool for advanced admins; the question was never answered. I > know what *I* use it for, I know what some other people use it for, > and I also know how else I'd *like* to use it. So I ask again, what > is yum's intended audience? My answer is.... false dilemma! Is a shovel a tool for working in your garden or burying your victims? I say both. -Michael -- Michael D. Stenner mstenner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ECE Department, the University of Arizona 520-626-1619 1230 E. Speedway Blvd., Tucson, AZ 85721-0104 ECE 524G
