Re: Announcing Debian Package Tags
On 29 Apr 2003 19:35:47 -0400, Colin Walters <email@example.com> said:
> On Tue, 2003-04-29 at 14:32, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 12:24:19 -0400, David Roundy
>> <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
>> To be precise, you said "Maybe novices should only be shown gui
>> programs after all". Not that novices should be allowed to decide
>> to only view gui programs IF THEY WISH, as you said later. The
>> first message impled that some one other than novices decides what
>> to show them, then you toned it down to being a choice of the end
>> user, which is acceptable.
> Manoj, the topic here is tuning Debian for different audiences.
> Believe it or not there are a huge number of people in the world for
> whom if you said "terminal application" or "gui" they just stare at
> you blankly. In fact they comprise the vast majority of people in
> the world. For most of these people, most console applications are
> just not usable.
> So having a version of Debian (or more precisely a Debian-based OS)
> which doesn't list console applications by default is entirely
> reasonable. Maybe you wouldn't use it. That's great. That's your
> choice. But there are people who would.
> I'm not advocating Debian proper itself do this, so if that's what
> your concerned about, rest assured, it will not happen.
I think we are talking past each other. I think that this
deliberate culling of all but gui apps may well be the choice of the
user -- but it should be an choice that the user makes, with an easy
way of reversing it to see the full power of a Debian system.
If this is a distribtuion, and once the installed, the user
has no way of reversing the blinkers apart from a reinstall, I think
that is doing the novice a disservice.
Novices are not novices for ever. But if the system is
deliberately hidden from them unconditionally, this obfuscation makes
it had for them to ever learn.
Every one takes off the training wheels after a
time. Preventing novice users from being able to do that is harmful
_That_ is what I object to.
I'm sure that that could be indented more readably, but I'm scared of
the awk parser. --Larry Wall in <6849@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV>
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C