On Sunday 28 March 2004 06.17, Henning Makholm wrote: > Scripsit Nicolas Mailhot <Nicolas.Mailhot@laPoste.net> > > 2. at this point you can probably not hide them since they won't result > > in too much clutter > > I'd tend to think that even one name that is not dotted is too much > clutter. There's a strong unix tradition that *any* name in ~ that > does not begin with a dot should belong to the user alone. *strongly agree* > Perhaps FOO="..."? I think it should be a real name, giving the user some clue what he might expect. '.conf' perhaps, but I'm not happy. > > 3. do not try to keep current dotfiles/dotdirs in your spec but move > > them to your clean file layout Perhaps just ignore current dotfiles? > The /home/shared part of the proposal is at once too general and not > general enough. Most computers who have more than one user to share > data between tend to have *many* users, so one would quickly want a > way to share software between smaller sets of users (I may trust that > software installed by Tom and Jennifer is not intentionally trojaned, > but there is no way that I will put into my $PATH a directory where > Charles from accounting has write rights). There could be group home direcories, aligned along unix groups. Anything else, I guess, is pretty much unsolvable, users would just have to massage their $PATH manually, I guess with a proper configuration tool this should not be a problem even for novice users. greetings -- vbi -- The content of this message may or may not reflect the opinion of me, my employer, my girlfriend, my cat or anybody else, regardless of the fact whether such an employer, girlfriend, cat, or anybody else exists. I (or my employer, girlfriend, cat or whoever) disclaim any legal obligations resulting from the above message. You, as the reader of this message, may or may not have the permission to redistribute this message as a whole or in parts, verbatim or in modified form, or to distribute any message at all.