sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg-modular and standards for questions
- From: Arwed von Merkatz <v.merkatz AT gmx.net>
- To: SM Discuss <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg-modular and standards for questions
- Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 16:32:14 +0200
On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 08:23:49AM -0600, David Brown wrote:
> I compiled xorg-modular yesterday in an attempt to get a newer x
> server so I could start seeing how broke my laptop is... I noticed a
> few things.
>
> steps I took were as follows:
> 1) add xorg-modular grimoire
> 2) dispel xorg
> 3) cast libx11 (just to be different)
> 4) cast xorg-server
>
> it worked fine and with a little tweeking on the xorg-server spell I
> was able to get it installed.
>
> but I did notice several things on the questions being asked of the
> user and it went something like this:
>
> Enable <blah> support? [y]
> Disable <blah> support? [n]
> Enable <blah> support? [y]
>
> This confused me greatly, I'm used to seeing "<posative-action>
> <part-o-spell> support?" questions with a default safe answer
> ('posative-action' mean enable, to start, to build, anything
> non-negative). With the rate I go through questions having to process
> a double negative to figure out what happens is to much.
>
> So I was wondering if we had some sort of standard or agreed upon
> general format for question?
We don't have one so far.
Positive questions are probably easier overall.
--
Arwed v. Merkatz Source Mage GNU/Linux developer
http://www.sourcemage.org
-
[SM-Discuss] xorg-modular and standards for questions,
David Brown, 06/22/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] xorg-modular and standards for questions, Arwed von Merkatz, 06/22/2006
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.