Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (6210 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [opensuse] Routing Root's Mail to Another User
- From: Carl Hartung <suselinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 11:51:42 -0400
- Message-id: <200510101151.42690.suselinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Monday 10 October 2005 06:38, nordi wrote:
> houghi wrote:
> > I have a solution for this bug. Just turn it off by default. Problem
> > solved. <Ducks> ;-)
>
> People have suggested that before, and that suggestion got rejected.
> Have a look at bug #117676 for example.
Hi All,
I'm submitting my last comments on this subject, as I've had a chance to sleep
and mull the discussion over.
1. There are two competing camps, default 'on' and default 'off'. Each has
precedents, facts and a rational purpose behind them, meaning there is no
clear "right way" or "wrong way" when the conflict is viewed as an either/or
proposition.
2. The conflict emerges as a natural consequence of the principal benefit from
each side being viewed by the other as a flaw. The reality is the features
are symmetrical and balanced, they represent diametrically opposed
perspectives but *not* opposite goals, so the debate becomes protracted and
circular, meaning it will never resolve to a clear "winner."
3. There exists a middle ground, however, a design change which effectively
accommodates the two views, bringing peace and harmony back to the world.
Well... at least on this topic. :-)
4. Briefly outline the advantages and disadvantages of each login arrangement
wherever the choice is offered, but remain as neutral as possible in the
presentation. This can be accomplished by providing a single two checkbox
"<>On <>Off" control which is not preselected when the dialog appears. This
allows the enduser to make a reasonably informed choice without interpreting
the preset control as a "recommended" or "default" choice, thereby absolving
Novell/SUSE of any moral/karmic liabilities and ensuring the basic concerns
of each camp are addressed.
I recognize that this shaves off a tiny fraction of the default 'on' camp's
territory by putting the decision squarely back on the enduser, but any truly
neutral solution is going do that. I suggest, in the interest of putting this
debate to rest permanently, the solution is worth a very small compromise.
Comments? I look forward to reading them but a cyclic debate, once recognized
as such, is futile to pursue.
regards,
- Carl
> houghi wrote:
> > I have a solution for this bug. Just turn it off by default. Problem
> > solved. <Ducks> ;-)
>
> People have suggested that before, and that suggestion got rejected.
> Have a look at bug #117676 for example.
Hi All,
I'm submitting my last comments on this subject, as I've had a chance to sleep
and mull the discussion over.
1. There are two competing camps, default 'on' and default 'off'. Each has
precedents, facts and a rational purpose behind them, meaning there is no
clear "right way" or "wrong way" when the conflict is viewed as an either/or
proposition.
2. The conflict emerges as a natural consequence of the principal benefit from
each side being viewed by the other as a flaw. The reality is the features
are symmetrical and balanced, they represent diametrically opposed
perspectives but *not* opposite goals, so the debate becomes protracted and
circular, meaning it will never resolve to a clear "winner."
3. There exists a middle ground, however, a design change which effectively
accommodates the two views, bringing peace and harmony back to the world.
Well... at least on this topic. :-)
4. Briefly outline the advantages and disadvantages of each login arrangement
wherever the choice is offered, but remain as neutral as possible in the
presentation. This can be accomplished by providing a single two checkbox
"<>On <>Off" control which is not preselected when the dialog appears. This
allows the enduser to make a reasonably informed choice without interpreting
the preset control as a "recommended" or "default" choice, thereby absolving
Novell/SUSE of any moral/karmic liabilities and ensuring the basic concerns
of each camp are addressed.
I recognize that this shaves off a tiny fraction of the default 'on' camp's
territory by putting the decision squarely back on the enduser, but any truly
neutral solution is going do that. I suggest, in the interest of putting this
debate to rest permanently, the solution is worth a very small compromise.
Comments? I look forward to reading them but a cyclic debate, once recognized
as such, is futile to pursue.
regards,
- Carl
| < Previous | Next > |