RFC: KConfig XT (KDE 3.2)
neil at qualityassistant.com
Mon Mar 17 18:40:02 GMT 2003
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Monday March 17, 2003 04:56, Alexander Kellett wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 16, 2003 at 08:51:32PM -0800, Neil Stevens wrote:
> > You're right. The fact that I'd not heard of it proves it's not being
> > used as a reason to strip down KControl. That's great.
> i think that taking the existance of kconfedit into account
> could limit the size of the configuration dialogs by a fair
> bit in some places, its quite obvious that some options are
> there that are not needed by even 1% of the users. reducing
> the need that devels feel to add ui's for all these obscure
> options will probably increase devel productivity also.
See, that's the exact attitude that I'm fearing KConfEdit will enforce.
You talk about "1%" of users... But every feature has a different "1%"
that it affects! So if you remove 50 different "1%" options, you hurt up
to 50% of the users!
Neil Stevens - neil at qualityassistant.com
"The shepherd drives the wolf from the sheep's throat, for which the
sheep thanks the shepherd as a liberator, while the wolf denounces him
for the same act as the destroyer of liberty." -- Abraham Lincoln
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the kde-core-devel