Re: File manager tree.

[James Green <gnome cyberstorm demon co uk>]

On Sat, 29 May 1999, Paul Warren wrote:

> On Fri, 28 May 1999, Cory Watson wrote:
> 
> > >Basically guys, whenever a desision like this needs making, rather than
> > >taking a vote and displeasing some, let's just have an options in the
> > >prefs.
> > 
> > Excellent point James!
> 
> Hmm. I disagree.  This is a reasonable philosophy, but it must be balanced
> against the effect it has on bloat and code readability.  Yes, make things
> options, but first evaluate if what you are making an option is actually
> useful, or is in fact just going to confuse many people, and help a few.

I was assuming a little intelligence and sense on the part of the coder at
the time or writing :-)

Stuff that isn't going to be used very often by anyone can be left out
AFAIAC, it's a bit like having Linus every patch into the Linux that each
organisation makes to customise it to their needs - if it's useful and it
works and is a sound idea, include as an option, otherwise don't bother.

Of course, there may be exceptions and borderline cases, and I guess we'll
cross those bridges as we come to them.

> More options also lead to bugs going unnoticed for longer.  For example,
> if you have 5 boolean options that are not entirely independent, there 
> are 2^5 = 32 possible configurations.  If a bug only becomes apparent in
> one of these, it could be a long time before it gets spotted by someone
> with the skills to fix it.

Quite. I do remember debugging myself, although I haven't yet had a major
programming project.

> I don't agree with options for the sake of options.  Make the default
> configuration Good and Sensible, and little few options are actually
> required.

Well, a good deal of customisation of the UI Layout and functionality
can be made, as can be seen all over Gnome, but I agree with you that
silly things shouldn't make the cut.

-- 
James Green
http://www.cyberstorm.demon.co.uk/
Home of the demon.tech.modems 56k FAQ.