On Sun, 26 Mar 2006 11:34:57 -0500 (EST)
"Dimi Paun" <dimi@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> This is the crux of the issue: this problem does not have an obvious
> correct solution. A normal approach would be "do no evil". That is,
> there should be a hysteresis against changing well known behavior that
> is tried, tested, and true. Experimental stuff like this should be
> introduced gradually, with default to off, and only when it has been
> proven in the field we may turn it on by default.
Assuming that the developers believed they did have the correct
solution they followed a reasonable course. Well, there should
have been an easy way to turn it off, but otherwise it was fine.
> <offtopic>
> Don't people find it funny that we, as a community, know all about
> incremental improvements when it comes to patch management, but we behave
> like righteous a--holes when it comes to imposing what we believe to be
> the Right Way (TM) onto others? And hey, since we can now invoke the
> Usability Principle, we are in the right to remove any way for the
> luser to opt-out of our One True Way.
>
> But I digress, we are not the target audience...
> </offtopic>
The more experimental kernel trees (eg. -mm) often ship wildly
speculative features forced on just to get wider testing. It is
easy to argue that Fedora is similiar in spirit in the distro space.
That said, I hate this feature and am willing to participate in any
public lynching of those who foisted it on us.
Sean
P.S. By the way, I only see this behavior from gnome-terminal, not the
menu or xterm like you seem to be seeing.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
