Re: Arlo, a little QA comment regarding your interview withlinux.com

["Guillermo S. Romero / Familia Romero" <famrom idecnet com>]

sullivan eazel com (2000-10-25 at 0936.32 -0700):
> > For example, in GNOME in the File Manager, in order to show the hidden
> > files I have to go to the settings menu and select preferences and then
> > select the hidden files option.  While I normally don't have the show
> > hidden files selected, from a user's perspective of time, it would be
> > nice to have this in the menu itself rather than bringing up a dialog
> > box.
> This is a good case to think about for the tradeoffs involved.
[...]
> On the other hand, in theory anyway, hidden files are hidden for a reason -- they
> aren't intended for users to futz with. So making it really easy to display them
> is likely to lead to some users getting into trouble by messing with them when
> they shouldn't.

Well, then why do read-only files existed? Or file ownership? IIRC the
hidden file idea is about hide things you do not want to see every
time you list files, not to make access harder. I see it more near to
the different view functions than to avoid problems.

[...] 
> So (like everything), it's a tradeoff. I'm not sure what the "right" answer is
> for this particular case for Nautilus. I just wanted to point out that even
> apparently simple decisions like this one are rarely simple.

I know what I want or the default (hide hidden), but not what is good
for all, or to be precisse what to implement that (easy or hard
access). :[

GSR