On Wednesday 30 November 2005 07:00, Christian Perrier wrote: > As discussed with Frans, keeping this as a preseedable-only value is > kind of a "secret" feature in d-i. So, even if it does not appear > vital (Colin and maybe Joey do not seem deeply fond of this), we can > imagine adding some code around this to turn it into a question during > the install. I'm in two minds about this. I really do think having such a hidden hack is bad. But reading the reason Colin put it in yesterday (as a one off hack for a specific customer) makes me think it may be more appropriate to just delete that variable from mainline code than to extend it. When I discussed it with you on IRC, I could not really think of a use case for it (but that in itself is not a strong argument for anything :-) I was just assuming there was a valid use case as otherwise it would not have been put in. Having templates (and bothering translators with them) for something for which there is no use case is IMO worse that leaving as is... Anyway, Colin's opinion in this should count a lot heavier than mine. I haven't looked at the code, but if it is kept in, it should at least be documented why it was put in and how it could be useful. That will at least help maintainability in the long run. Cheers, FJP
Attachment:
pgpyZCG80cjlv.pgp
Description: PGP signature