Re: (forw) Debconf abuse by several packages
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 2004-01-20 22:44, Steve Greenland wrote:
> On 20-Jan-04, 15:11 (CST), Christian Perrier <email@example.com> wrote:
> > The problem is elsewhere: ALL DD, please go to the end of the report
> > and look at the number of screens users are shown. Twenty-Seven
> > screens, several of these belonging to obscure packages Joe User is
> > even not aware of.
> Thanks for doing this, Christian. I've only got one additional comment:
> > Avoid using high priority questions for anything that has a reasonable
> > default.
> If *all* of your package's debconf questions have a reasonable default,
> then don't ask them at *any* priority. Use a conffile. Part of your
> job as a Debian maintainer is to make choices for the user. They can
> override them if they choose to, and by using a conffile, it becomes
> easier to keep up with upstream changes.
Please do ask them (at low priority), that makes it a _lot_ easier for CDD's
to create a custom initial setup geared for a particular group of users
1. Encrypted mail preferred (GPG KeyID: 0x86624ABB)
2. Plain-text mail recommended since I move html and double
format mails to a low priority folder (they're mainly spam)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----