[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#142944: fixing debconf stdin bug

Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> 	I can understand that -- you have written debconf, and it
>  probably perfectly satisfies your needs, and behaves in a fashion
> that feels absolutely natural and logical to you.

That has nothing to do with my reasons for feeling this is a bad idea.
In fact I've done a fair bit of work on transitioning us to cdebconf
(which I did not write) and expect to do more. Moreover, as with most
software I write (or paintings I paint..), I can see problems in debconf
that most people are not particularly aware of.

My reasons have more to do with why we want to use a system like debconf
in the first place, and how something like what you're describing could
seriously undermine its advantages. Things like UI consitency, user
control, a simple frontend-agnostic protocol, etc.

As I said I'd prefer to not go into my reasons in depth here, so I'd
appreciate it if you didn't attribute incorrect reasons to me.

see shy jo

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: